2019 california school dashboard technical guide: final ... · 2. key changes to the dashboard:...

Accountability System

2019 California School Dashboard Technical Guide: FINAL VERSION

2019–20 School Year

December 2019

Prepared by the California Department of Education

Available on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support Web Page at: https://www.cde.ca.gov/dashboard/.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ay/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ay/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/dashboard/

2 0 1 9 C A L I F O R N I A S C H O O L D A S H B O A R D T E C H N I C A L G U I D E – F I N A L V E R S I O N

California Department of Education December 2019 i

Table of ContentsPreface .................................................................................................................................... 1 2019 Dashboard Reporting Timeline .................................................................................... 2 Key Changes to the Dashboard: What’s New? ................................................................... 3 What Data Are Used for the 2019 Dashboard? .................................................................... 7 What Data Will Be Used for the 2020 Dashboard? .............................................................. 8 California’s Integrated Accountability and Continuous Improvement System ................ 9

Background ....................................................................................................................... 9 An Integrated Accountability System ............................................................................... 10

Who Gets a Dashboard? .................................................................................................... 13 Local Educational Agency-Level Data ............................................................................. 13

Alternative and Charter Schools ...................................................................................... 13 Dashboard Alternative Schools Status .............................................................................. 14

Eligibility Criteria .............................................................................................................. 14 Schools that Are Automatically Assigned an Alternative Status ...................................... 14 Schools that Are Eligible to Apply for Alternative Status ................................................. 15 Participation Form and Instructions ................................................................................. 17 Withdrawing from DASS .................................................................................................. 17 Dashboard Reporting Timeline and Modified Methods for DASS Schools ...................... 17 Additional Resources on DASS ....................................................................................... 17

How Do You Get a Performance Level (or Color)? ........................................................... 18 The California Model ....................................................................................................... 18 Status Levels and Cut Scores ......................................................................................... 18 Change Levels and Cut Scores ...................................................................................... 19 Performance Level (or Color) .......................................................................................... 19 Gauges ............................................................................................................................ 20 Automatic Assignment of Orange .................................................................................... 21

Small Populations: Less than 150 Students ...................................................................... 22 Applicable at LEA, School, and Student Group Levels.................................................... 22 N-Size is Less than 150 .................................................................................................. 22 Three-by-Five Methodology ............................................................................................ 23 Adjusted Three-by-Five Colored Table for Suspension Rate Indicator............................ 23


California Department of Education December 2019 ii

Table of Contents (Cont.) Adjusted Three-by-Five Colored Table for Graduation Rate Indicator ............................ 24 Adjusted Three-by-Five Colored Table for Chronic Absenteeism Rate Indicator ............ 24 Adjusted Three-by-Five Colored Table for College/Career Indicator ............................... 25 Next Steps ....................................................................................................................... 25

Who Gets a Performance Level (or Color)? ....................................................................... 26 Exception: Foster Youth and Homeless .......................................................................... 26 Less than 30 Students ..................................................................................................... 26

Overview of the California School Dashboard .................................................................. 28 Performance on State and Local Indicators .................................................................... 28 Student Population .......................................................................................................... 29 Additional Data on Each Measure ................................................................................... 30 Equity Report .................................................................................................................. 31 Student Group Performance ........................................................................................... 31 View All Schools .............................................................................................................. 32 Local Indicators ............................................................................................................... 32

Student Groups .................................................................................................................... 35 Student Group Calculation .............................................................................................. 36 Student Groups Reported in the Dashboard ................................................................... 36 Student Group Definitions and Data Source ................................................................... 38 Additional Student Groups Reported in Academic Indicator ............................................ 40

LEA and School Type .......................................................................................................... 41 LEA Type for Reporting Purposes ................................................................................... 41 School Type for Reporting Purposes .............................................................................. 41

Dashboard Indicators .......................................................................................................... 42 Academic Performance ....................................................................................................... 43 Academic Indicator (Grades 3–8 and Grade 11): English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics ......................................................................................................................... 43

Changes for this Indicator ............................................................................................... 43

Who Receives this Indicator? ......................................................................................... 43 Data Source .................................................................................................................... 44 Differences Between CAASPP and Dashboard .............................................................. 44


California Department of Education December 2019 iii

Table of Contents (Cont.)Participation Rate .......................................................................................................... 45

Who is Held Responsible for the 95 Percent Participation Rate Goal? .......................... 45

Which Content Areas Are Used to Calculate the Participation Rate? ............................ 45

Which Students Are Automatically Removed from the Participation Rate Calculations? 45

Do Parent Waivers Exempt Students from the Participation Rate Calculations? ........... 46

Calculating the Participation Rate ................................................................................... 47

Participation Rate Formula ......................................................................................... 47

Determining the Accountability Testing Window ......................................................... 47

Determining the Participation Rate Denominator: Enrolled ......................................... 48

Students Who Transfer In or Out ................................................................................ 48

Who Is Held Responsible if a Student Transfers ......................................................... 49 District of Residence Rule for Students with Disabilities ............................................. 51

District of Residence = District of Special Education Accountability (DSEA) Field in CALPADS ................................................................................................................... 52

Which LEA is Responsible for Reporting the District of Special Education Accountability Data? ................................................................................................... 52

Determining the Participation Rate Numerator: Tested ............................................... 55

Distance from Standard (DFS) ..................................................................................... 56

Which Content Areas Are Used to Calculate DFS? ................................................... 56

Which Students Are Excluded from the DFS Calculations? ........................................ 56

Which Students Are Included in the DFS Calculations? .............................................. 56

Parent Waivers ............................................................................................................ 57

DFS for Smarter Balanced Assessments ........................................................................ 57

DFS for California Alternate Assessments ...................................................................... 59

Calculate DFS for LEA, School, or Student Group .......................................................... 61

Can the Participation Rate Reduce the DFS? ................................................................ 61

Is the Participation Rate Calculated for Student Groups? .............................................. 62

Will the Participation Rate Be Reported on the Dashboard? .......................................... 62

Calculated Formula for Status for K–8 and K–12 LEAs, Schools, and Student Groups ..63

Calculation Formula for Status for High Schools (Grades 7–12) and High School Districts ........................................................................................................................................ 63


California Department of Education December 2019 iv

Table of Contents (Cont.)Calculation Formula for Change for All LEAs and Schools ............................................. 64

Federal Requirement: Pair and Share for K, 1, and/or 2 Schools Only ........................... 64

Automatic Assignment of an Orange Performance Level ................................................ 65

Cut Scores and Five-by-Five Tables ............................................................................... 66

Student Groups and Data Collection ............................................................................... 67

Examples on How to Calculate the Participation Rate and Distance from Standard ....... 67

Next Steps ....................................................................................................................... 76

College/Career Indicator (Grades 9–12) ............................................................................. 79 Changes for this Indicator ............................................................................................... 79 Who Receives this Indicator? ......................................................................................... 79 Data Sources .................................................................................................................. 79 Explaining the College/Career Indicator .......................................................................... 80 College/Career Indicator Measures ................................................................................. 80 Data Sources and Amendment Windows ........................................................................ 83 College/Career Indicator Model and Benchmark Criteria ................................................ 86 Status and Change Calculation Formulas ....................................................................... 89 Calculation Formula for Comprehensive High Schools ................................................... 89 Calculation Formula for DASS Schools ........................................................................... 89 Calculation Formula for LEAs ......................................................................................... 90 Cut Scores, Five-by-Five Colored Table, and Three-by-Five Colored Table ................... 90 Student Groups and Data Collection ............................................................................... 91 Additional Reports on How Student Groups Performed on Each Measure ..................... 91 Example on How to Calculate the College/Career Indicator ............................................ 91

College/Career Indicator for DASS Schools ...................................................................... 95 How Do CCI Calculations Differ for DASS Schools? ...................................................... 95

How Many Years of Data are Used? .............................................................................. 96

Data Source .................................................................................................................... 96

Calculation Formula for Status ........................................................................................ 96

Calculation Formula for Change ...................................................................................... 97

Cut Scores, Five-by-Five Colored Table, and Three-by-Five Colored Table ................... 97

Student Groups and Data Collection ............................................................................... 97


California Department of Education December 2019 v

Table of Contents (Cont.)Additional Reports on How Student Groups Performed on Each Measure ..................... 97

Example on How to Calculate the College/Career Indicator for DASS Schools .............. 97

Next Steps ..................................................................................................................... 102

English Learner Progress Indicator (Grades 1–12) ........................................................ 104 Changes for this Indicator ............................................................................................. 104

Who Receives this Indicator? ....................................................................................... 104

Data Sources ................................................................................................................ 104

ELPI Levels for Accountability Purposes ....................................................................... 105

Calculation of the ELPI Status Rate .............................................................................. 107

Status Cut Scores ......................................................................................................... 108

Automatic Assignment of ‘Low’ ELPI Status Level ........................................................ 109

Local Indicator: Implementation of Academic Standards (Priority 2) .......................... 110 Self-Assessment Tool for Priority 2 ............................................................................... 110

Chronic Absenteeism Indicator ........................................................................................ 113 Who Receives this Indicator? ....................................................................................... 113

Data Source .................................................................................................................. 113

Differences Between DataQuest and Dashboard ......................................................... 113

Chronic Absenteeism Definition (Numerator) ............................................................... 113

Eligible Enrollment (Denominator) ................................................................................ 114

Key Difference: Reverse Goal ...................................................................................... 115

Automatic Assignment of an Orange Performance Level ............................................. 115

Calculation Formula for Status ...................................................................................... 116

Calculation Formula for Change .................................................................................... 116 Cut Scores, Five-by-Five Colored Table, and Three-by-Five Colored Table ................ 116 Student Groups and Data Collection ............................................................................. 116 Example for Chronic Absenteeism ............................................................................... 117

Academic Engagement...................................................................................................... 119 Graduation Rate Indicator (Grades 9–12) ....................................................................... 119

Changes to this Indicator ............................................................................................... 119 Who Receives this Indicator? ....................................................................................... 119 Data Source .................................................................................................................. 120


California Department of Education December 2019 vi

Table of Contents (Cont.) Differences Between DataQuest and Dashboard ......................................................... 120 Combined Four- and Five-Year Graduation Rate for Comprehensive High Schools

...................................................................................................................................... 122 Calculation Method........................................................................................................ 122 Who Counts as a Graduate (Numerator) in the Combined Rate? ................................ 123 Who Counts in the Denominator? ................................................................................ 124 August 15 Cut Off Date ................................................................................................. 125 When Students Transfer, Who is Held Accoutable? ..................................................... 126 Modified Method: DASS Graduation Rate ................................................................. 126 What are Modified Methods and Why are They Only Applicable to DASS Schools? ... 126 Who Counts as a Graduate (Numerator) in the DASS Graduation Rate? .................... 126 Who Counts in the Denominator of the DASS Graduation Rate? ................................ 131 August 15 Cut Off Date and Summer Graduates .......................................................... 133 When Students Transfer Between Comprehensive and DASS Schools, or Between DASS Schools, Who is Held Accountable? ................................................................... 133 When Students Transfer Between Comprehensive and DASS Schools, or Between DASS Schools, Is the Student Included at the LEA-Level? ........................................... 135 Status and Change Calculation Formulas ................................................................ 137 Calculation Formulas for Comprehensive High Schools .............................................. 137 Calculation Formulas for DASS Schools ....................................................................... 138 Calculation Formulas for LEAs ...................................................................................... 138 Cut Scores, Five-by-Five Colored Table, and Three-by-Five Colored Table ................ 139 Student Groups and Data Collection ............................................................................. 139 Graduation Rate Examples ........................................................................................... 140 Five-Year Graduation Rate Reported for Comprehensive High Schools Only ...... 145 Next Steps ..................................................................................................................... 145

Local Indicators: Access to a Broad Course of Study (Priority 7) ................................ 146 Self-Assessment Tool for Priority 7 ............................................................................... 146

Suspension Rate Indicator ................................................................................................ 147 Changes to this Indicator .............................................................................................. 147 Who Receives this Indicator? ....................................................................................... 147 Data Source .................................................................................................................. 147 Differences between DataQuest and Dashboard .......................................................... 147 Suspension Rate Rules ................................................................................................. 148


California Department of Education December 2019 vii

Table of Contents (Cont.) What is a Suspension? .................................................................................................. 148 Suspension (Discipline) CALPADS Reporting Rules .................................................... 150 Key Differences ............................................................................................................. 151 Automatic Assignment of an Orange Performance Level .............................................. 151 Calculation Formula for Status ...................................................................................... 152 Calculation Formula for Change .................................................................................... 152 Cut Scores, Five-by-Five Colored Tables, and Three-by-Five Colored Table .............. 152 Student Groups and Data Collection ............................................................................. 153 Suspension Rate Examples .......................................................................................... 153

Local Indicators: Basics (Priority 1), Parent and Family Engagement (Priority 3), and Local Climate Survey (Priority 6) ..................................................................................... 157

LCFF Priority 1: Basic (Availability of Textbooks, Adequate Facilities, and Correctly Assigned Teachers) ..................................................................................................... 157

LCFF Priority 3: Parent and Family Engagement .......................................................... 157

LCFF Priority 6: School Climate .................................................................................... 159

Additional Information ....................................................................................................... 160 Standard Rounding Rules ............................................................................................. 160

New Schools ................................................................................................................. 160

Closed Schools ............................................................................................................. 160

County-District-School Code ......................................................................................... 160

Additional Reports: CCI, Participation Rate, Student Groups, and Five-by-Five ......... 161 Five-by-Five Placement Reports ................................................................................... 161

Has Anything Changed with the Five-by-Five Report Since the 2018 Dashboard? ..... 162

Who Receives a Five-by-Five Report? .......................................................................... 162

How Does the Five-by-Five Placement Reports Relate to the Dashboard? .................. 162

What is included in the Five-by-Five Placement Reports? ............................................ 162

District LEA and Charter LEA Eligibility for Differentiated Assistance ......................... 165 Eligibility Criteria for Assistance that Are Applied to District LEAs and COEs Differ from Criteria Applied to Charter School LEAs in 2019 ........................................................... 165

LCFF Eligibility for Assistance Criteria Applied to District LEAs and COEs ................... 165

Criteria by Priority Area ................................................................................................ 165


California Department of Education December 2019 viii

Table of Contents (Cont.) Examples of How District LEAs and COEs Become Eligible for Differentiated Assistance

...................................................................................................................................... 167

LCFF Eligibility for Assistance Criteria Applied to Charter LEAs ................................... 172

Eligibility Criteria Applied to Charter LEAs with Three or More Student Groups .......... 173

Eligibility Criteria Applied to Charter LEAs with Two or Fewer ..................................... 174

School Eligiblity for Comprehensive Support and Improvement .................................. 178 Schools with Graduation Rate Below 67 Percent (CSI-Low Graduation Rate Schools) 179

Lowest-Performing Title I Schools (CSI—Lowest Performing Schools) ........................ 179

Examples of How Schools Become Eligible for CSI ...................................................... 179

Small Schools Program for CSI ..................................................................................... 182

School Eligibility for Targeted/Additional Targeted Support and Improvement .......... 183 Examples of How Schools Become Eligible for Targeted/Additional Targeted Support and Improvement ................................................................................................................. 184

Appendix A: Distributions, Cut Scores, and Five-by-Five Colored Tables ................... 186 Appendix B: Self-Assessment Tools for Local Indicators 9 and 10 .............................. 240 Appendix C: Academic Indicator: Participation Rate and Distance from Standard: Inclusion and Exclusion Flowchart .................................................................................. 243 Appendix D: Scale Score Ranges for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ...................................................................................................................... 250 Appendix E: Scale Score Ranges for the California Alternate Assessments ............... 251 Appendix F: Descriptive Text for Images in the Guide ................................................... 252 CDE Contacts and Related Internet Pages ...................................................................... 261 Acronyms ........................................................................................................................... 263


California Department of Education December 2019 1

Preface This guide provides technical information on California’s accountability system, specifically in regards to the state and local indicators reported in the California School Dashboard (Dashboard). The guide is intended for accountability and Dashboard coordinators at local educational agencies (LEAs) to access the calculation methodology and rules used to produce each of the state indicators. The guide also provides an overview of the local indicators, available resources that are related to the Dashboard, information on the systems of support under the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), and an update on the identification of schools for comprehensive and targeted support under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). This guide also reflects the requirements that were approved within the state’s ESSA State Plan, which was approved by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) in July 2018 (see the California Department of Education [CDE] Every Student Succeeds Act web page https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/es/). This guide is not intended to serve as a substitute for state and federal laws or regulations. The guide should be used in conjunction with information provided through the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/dashboard, as well as from e-mails and correspondence disseminated by the CDE to accountability and Dashboard coordinators. If you wish to be added to the CDE accountability coordinators listserv, please visit the Accountability Listserv web page at https://www.accountabilityinfo.org/. This guide is produced by the CDE’s Academic Accountability Unit (AAU) and Data Visualization and Reporting Office (DVRO) in the Analysis, Measurement, and Accountability Reporting Division. Questions about: • The Academic Indicator, College/Career Indicator, Chronic Absenteeism Indicator,

Graduation Rate Indicator, Suspension Rate Indicator, and CDE accountability coordinators listserv, contact the AAU by phone at 916-319-0863 or by e-mail at [email protected].

• The English Learner Progress Indicator, contact the DVRO by phone at 916-323-3071 or by e-mail at [email protected]. LCFF LEA differentiated assistance and ESSA school support determinations, contact the DVRO by phone at 916-323-3071 or by e-mail at [email protected].

• Logging onto the Dashboard, registering as an LEA Dashboard Coordinator, uploading local indicators into the Dashboard, and the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP), contact the Local Agency Support Systems Office (LASSO) by e-mail at [email protected].

• California’s System of Support, contact the System of Support Office (SSO) by e-mail

at [email protected]. Material in this publication is not copyrighted and may be reproduced.

https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/es/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/dashboard

https://www.accountabilityinfo.org/

mailto:[email protected]







2019 Dashboard Reporting Timeline

November 2019: LEA Preview of the Dashboard

The Dashboard preview period was a “rolling weekly release” where two state indicators were released for preview each week. This allowed LEAs sufficient time to review each indicator thoroughly and provide feedback to the CDE as necessary.

The preview was only accessible to Dashboard Coordinators, Secure Accountability Coordinators, and CALPADS LEA Administrators.

November and December 2019: Release of Preview and Final Dashboard Technical Guide The preview version of the Dashboard Technical Guide was made available to download to LEA Dashboard Coordinators and Secure Accountability Coordinators during the LEA preview of the Dashboard in November 2019. The final Dashboard Technical Guide reflects decisions made by the State Board of Education (SBE) at their November 2019 meeting on the English Learner Progress Indicator (ELPI). When the Dashboard was publicall released, this final guide was posted on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/.

November 1, 2019: Local Indicators Submission Deadline The deadline for LEAs to complete the local indicators and submit its results to the Dashboard was November 1, 2019. If an LEA did not complete the self-reflection tool and submit its results for a local indicator by the deadline, the Dashboard will show as Not Met by default.

Week of December 9–13, 2019: Public Release of the Dashboard The 2019 Dashboard data results was released during the week of December 9th. These results were used in determination of LEAs eligible for differentiated assistance as required by LCFF and determination of schools eligible for comprehensive and targeted/additional targeted support and improvement as required under the ESSA. For additional details regarding the support for LEAs and schools, please see the sections titled:

• “District LEA and Charter LEA Eligibility for Differentiated Assistance,” • “School Eligibility for Comprehensive Support and Improvement,” and • “School Eligibility for Targeted/Additional Targeted Support and Improvement.”

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/



Key Changes to the Dashboard: What’s New?

Annual Review of the State Indicators: In March of each year, the SBE annually reviews state and local indicators and performance standards. The purpose of this annual review process is to determine whether any changes or improvements are necessary based on newly available data, recent research, and/or stakeholder feedback. If changes are necessary, the SBE approves the implementation plan. This section identifies changes or additions made by the SBE to the reporting of the state indicators for the 2019 Dashboard. For complete details of these changes, please review the sections in the guide pertaining to each state indicator.

Academic Indicator

• Incorporation of the California Alternate Assessments (CAAs): ESSA requires states to incorporate the assessment results of all students—including those with the most significant cognitive disabilities–into their state accountability systems. In accordance with this requirement, beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, CAA results will be incorporated in the Distance from Standard (DFS) calculations for the Academic Indicator. Thus, the Academic Indicator will now reflect results from both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and the CAA.

• New Status Cut Scores for Schools with Dashboard Alternative School Status: Based on feedback from the California Alternative Schools Task Force, the CDE proposed at the September 2019 SBE meeting, a modified set of Status cut scores for schools with a Dashboard Alternative School Status (DASS). The modifications were made to the Very Low and Low Status levels only. Revisions to the Change cut scores were not proposed as the Change for DASS schools were not markedly different than the Change distributions for LEAs.

• The district of residence rule is now applied to all students with disabilities

(SWDs). In prior years, the district of residence (also known as the District of Special Education Accountability in the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System [CALPADS]) was held accountable for only those SWDs who receive services from a special education school in another LEA or a non-public school (NPS). Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, this business rule has been expanded so that the district of residence is held accountable for all SWDs regardless of where they receive special education services.

• Recalculation of Prior Year Data to Incorporate New Changes. Due to the

changes noted above, the CDE recalculated the 2018 data so that valid comparisons can be made when calculating Change.

College/Career Indicator • Using the combined four-and five-year graduation rate for comprehensive



high schools (i.e., non-DASS schools). In July 2019, the SBE approved the use of a combined four-and five-year graduation rate beginning with the 2019 Dashboard. This combined rate is applied to comprehensive high schools and LEAs that have comprehensive high schools. Because students counted in the Graduation Rate Indicator are used to calculate the College/Career Indicator (CCI), the combined rate will now be used to calculate the CCI for comprehensive high schools. (The DASS graduation rate will continue to be used to determine which students will be included in a DASS school’s CCI.)

• Approval of the three-by-five colored table. At the July 2019 SBE meeting, the

SBE approved the application of the three-by-five for the CCI. This methodology will be applied when the number of students in the combined four-and five-year graduation rate and/or the DASS graduation rate is 149 or less.

• Recalculation of Prior Year Data to Incorporate New Changes. Due to the

changes noted above, the CDE recalculated the 2018 data so that valid comparisons can be made when calculating Change.

English Learner Progress Indicator • Calculation of ELPI Status Only: For the 2018 Dashboard, the CDE displayed the

one year of English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC) Summative Assessment results available from the 2018 test administration. For the 2019 Dashboard, the CDE will produce Status only for the ELPI using two years of ELPAC Summative Assessment results from both the 2018 and 2019 test administrations. Since three years of ELPAC Summative Assessment results (2018, 2019, and 2020) are required to produce both Status and Change, the CDE will not be able to produce a performance level (or color) until the 2020 Dashboard.

• Assignment of ‘Low’ ELPI Status: Schools and LEAs testing less than 95 percent of K–12 EL students on the ELPAC SA will be assigned an ELPI Status of ‘Low’.

Graduation Rate Indicator • Approval of a Combined Four-and Five-Year Graduation Rate (Combined

Graduation Rate): In July 2019, the SBE approved the implementation of a combined graduation rate, which reflects all students who: (1) graduate in four years as part of the most current graduating class and (2) graduate in five years as part of the prior year graduating class. This new methodology allows for the Graduation Rate Indicator to reflect the progress of students who take five years to graduate from high school.

Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, the Graduation Rate Indicator for all comprehensive high schools (non-DASS schools) only will be based on the combined rate.

• Approval of Revised Status Levels: Because the addition of fifth-year graduates

increase graduation rates, in September 2019, the SBE approved that the Very



Low Status level threshold be raised from “below 67 percent” to “below 68 percent.” Adjusting the threshold for Very Low impacts the threshold for the adjacent Status level, Low. The change in these Status levels will be applied to all schools (DASS, non-DASS, and charter schools), LEAs, and student groups.

Although ESSA allows states to use an extended graduation rate for accountability, the long-term goal for the extended rate must be higher than the long-term goal for the four-year cohort graduation rate. At the November 2019 SBE meeting, the SBE approved a long-term goal of 90.5 percent for the extended rate (0.5 above the 90 percent goal that was approved via the ESSA State Plan for the four-year cohort rate). Therefore, the High and Medium Status cut scores for comprehensive high schools, and High and Very High Status cut scores for DASS, were revised.

• Recalculation of Prior Year Data to Incorporate New Changes. Due to thechanges noted above, the CDE recalculated the 2018 data so that validcomparisons can be made when calculating Change.

Suspension Rate• Using an aggregate suspension of one full day. Beginning in 2018–19, LEAs

were required to report all increments of suspension for all students. Becausestudents can have varying suspension length totals, for Dashboard purposes only,students who have an aggregate suspension of one full day (i.e., their totalsuspension value equals 1.0 or more) will be included in the calculation of thesuspension rate.

Differentiated Assistance under LCFF• Charter school LEA eligibility for assistance: In 2018, county offices of

education (COEs) and LEAs including elementary school, high school, andunified school districts were included in eligibility determinations for assistanceunder the LCFF. As of 2019, charter school LEAs, including both direct-fundedand locally-funded charters, will be included in LCFF eligibility for assistancedeterminations.

• Inclusion of the ELPI state indicator under LCFF Priority 4 (PupilAchievement): Because there will be no ELPI Change included on the 2019Dashboard, a performance level (or color) cannot be determined for the ELPIstate indicator under LCFF Priority 4 (Pupil Achievement). The ELPI stateindicator criteria will be based on ELPI Status only. An ELPI Status level of‘Very Low’ will be used in place of the color ‘Red’ as meeting the criteria for theELPI state indicator in 2019. An ELPI performance level (or color) will beavailable beginning with the 2020 Dashboard and used in 2020 eligibility forDifferentiated Assistance determinations.



Schools Eligible for Support under ESSA• CSI and ATSI determinations will be made again in 2019–20: The CDE first

began determining schools eligible for Comprehensive Support and Improvement(CSI) and Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (ATSI) in the 2018‒19school year. The school eligibility process for CSI and ATSI typically occurs onlyonce every three years. However, the CDE will determine schools eligible for CSIand ATSI again in 2019–20 in order to align the ESSA eligibility cycle to the threeyear LCFF cycle.

• Inclusion of the 2019 ELPI state indicator in CSI Lowest Performing Schoolsand ATSI determinations: Because there will be no ELPI Change included on the2019 Dashboard, a performance level (or color) cannot be determined for the ELPIstate indicator. The ELPI state indicator criteria for CSI Lowest Performing Schoolsand ATSI determinations will be based on ELPI Status only. An ELPI Status level of‘Very Low’ will be used in place of the color ‘Red’ as meeting the criteria for theELPI state indicator in 2019–20 CSI Lowest–Performing Schools and ATSIdeterminations. An ELPI performance level (or color) will be available beginningwith the 2020 Dashboard.

• Two-year average using combined four-and five-year graduation ratecalculated to determine schools eligible for CSI based on a low graduationrate: In the 2019–20 year, a two-year average using the 2017–18 and 2018–19combined four-and five-year graduation rate will be used to determine schoolseligible for CSI based on a low graduation rate of less than 68 percent.

• Determination of schools no longer eligible for CSI or ATSI: Schools eligible forCSI or ATSI under ESSA will be evaluated annually to determine continuedeligibility or exit. Those schools first determined to be eligible for CSI or ATSI duringthe 2018–19 school year will be evaluated in 2019–20 to determine continuedeligibility for support or exit.



What Data Are Used for the 2019 Dashboard? Table 1 identifies the data that will be used to calculate Status and Change for each of the state indicators uploaded to the Dashboard by the CDE. These data will be used for the 2019 Dashboard. Note that all indicators use the most current data available.

Table 1: Data Used for the 2019 Dashboard

Indicator Data Used for Status

Data Used for Change

Chronic Absenteeism Rate: Grades K–8

2018–19 Chronic Absenteeism Rate

2018–19 Chronic Absenteeism Rate minus


Suspension Rate: Grades K–12 2018–19 Suspension Rate

2018–19 Suspension Rate minus

2017–18 Suspension Rate English Learner

Progress: Grades 1–12

2017–18 and 2018–19 ELPAC Summative Assessment Results N/A (Need 3 years of ELPAC data to calculate Change)

Graduation Rate for Non-DASS Schools:

Grades 9–12 2018–19 combined four-and five-

year graduation rate 2018–19 combined four-and five-year graduation rate

minus 2017–18 combined four-and five-year graduation rate

DASS Graduation Rate: Grades 9–12 2018–19 DASS graduation rate

2018–19 DASS graduation rate minus

2017–18 DASS graduation rate

Academic: Grades 3–8 and

Grade 11

2019 Distance from Standard* for 2019 Summative

Assessments** for ELA and mathematics

2019 Distance from Standard minus

2018 Distance from Standard

College/Career for Non-DASS Schools:

Grades 9–12

“Prepared” Graduates in 2018–19 combined four-and five-year

graduation rate

“Prepared” Graduates in 2018–19 combined four-and five-year graduation rate

minus “Prepared” Graduates in 2017–18 combined four-and

five-year graduation rate

College/Career for DASS Schools: Grades 9–12

“Prepared” Graduates in 2018–19 DASS graduation rate


minus “Prepared” Graduates in 2017–18

DASS graduation rate *Distance from Standard calculations include incorporation of the participation rate when the

95 percent participation rate goal is not met. ** Summative Assessments includes both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and California Alternate Assessments.



What Data Will Be Used for the 2020 Dashboard? Table 2 identifies the data that will be used to calculate Status and Change for each of the state indicators uploaded to the Dashboard by the CDE for the 2020 Dashboard. The information in the table is subject to change based on any actions by the SBE.

Table 2: Data that May Be Used for the 2020 Dashboard Indicator Data Used for

Status Data Used for

Change

Chronic Absenteeism Rate: Grades K–8


2019–20 Chronic Absenteeism Rate minus


Suspension Rate: Grades K–12 2019–20 Suspension Rate

2019–20 Suspension Rate minus

2018–19 Suspension Rate

English Learner Progress:

Grades 1–12

2018–19 and 2019–20 ELPAC Summative Assessment Result

Progress

2018–19 and 2019–20 ELPAC Summative Assessment Result Progress

minus 2017–18 and 2018–19 ELPAC

Summative Assessment Result Progress Graduation Rate for

Non-DASS Schools: Grades 9–12

2019–20 combined four-and five-year graduation rate

2019–20 combined four-and five-year graduation rate minus

2018–19 combined four-and five-year graduation rate

DASS Graduation Rate: Grades 9–12 2019–20 DASS graduation rate

2019–20 DASS graduation rate minus

2018–19 DASS graduation rate

Academic: Grades 3–8 and

Grade 11

2020 Distance from Standard* for 2020 Summative

Assessments** for ELA and mathematics

2020 Distance from Standard minus

2019 Distance from Standard

College/Career for Non-DASS Schools:

Grades 9–12

“Prepared” Graduates 2019–20 combined four-and five-year

graduation rate

“Prepared” Graduates in the 2019–20 combined four-and five-year graduation rate

minus “Prepared” Graduates in the 2018–19 combined four-

and five-year graduation rate

College/Career for DASS Schools: Grades 9–12

“Prepared” Graduates in the 2019–20 DASS graduation rate


minus “Prepared” Graduates in 2018–19

DASS graduation rate *Distance from Standard calculations include incorporation of the participation rate when the

95 percent participation rate goal is not met. ** Summative Assessments includes both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and California Alternate Assessments.



California’s Integrated Accountability and Continuous Improvement System

Background On September 8, 2016, the SBE approved key elements of a new integrated accountability and continuous improvement system that will evaluate LEA and school performance in areas critical to students’ preparedness for college and career. These areas are founded on the LCFF ten state priorities and include graduation rates, suspension rates, chronic absenteeism rates, college/career preparedness, assessment scores, and the progress of ELs. With the implementation of the LCFF in 2014, LEAs are held accountable for improving student performance. Specifically, state law requires ten priority areas that school districts and charter schools must report in their LCAP. (Note: Two of the priority areas are limited to COEs.) These priority areas range from student achievement (performance on standardized tests and percent of English learners (ELs) that become English proficient); school climate (administer a Local Climate Survey every other year); student engagement (graduation rates, chronic absenteeism rates, etc.); and parent engagement. Information on the LCFF priority areas can be accessed on the CDE State Priority Related Resources web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/statepriorityresources.asp. In December 2015, the ESSA was signed into federal law, which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and replaced the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. One of the requirements under this law is for states to have a new multiple measures accountability system in effect by the 2017–18 school year based on the following five areas:

1. Achievement as measured by proficiency based on annual state assessments;

2. Four-year cohort graduation rates for high schools or an extended year graduation rate;

3. Another academic indicator for elementary and middle schools (e.g., chronic

absenteeism);

4. Progress in English language proficiency for English learners; and

5. At least one other indicator of school quality or student success that is valid, reliable, comparable, and statewide (e.g., postsecondary readiness, student engagement, etc.)

For more information, see the CDE Every Student Succeeds Act web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/es/.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/statepriorityresources.asp

https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/es/



An Integrated Accountability System Rather than developing two accountability systems––one that meets state requirements (LCFF) and another that meets federal requirements (ESSA)––an integrated local, state, and federal accountability and continuous improvement system founded on the LCFF priority areas that also aligns to ESSA requirements has been developed. The accountability system, based on multiple measures, uses the Dashboard, which includes state and local performance standards for all LCFF priorities, to report progress. These performance standards will be used to:

1. Support LEAs in identifying strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement;

2. Assist in determining whether LEAs are eligible for assistance; and

3. Assist the SSPI in determining whether LEAs are eligible for more intensive state support/intervention.

Table 3 displays the ten LCFF priority areas of the accountability system. Table 3: State and Local Indicators Listed by Priority Area

Priority Area State Indicator Local Indicator

Priority 1: Basic Services or Basic Condition at Schools

N/A

Annual measurement of appropriately assigned teachers, access to curriculum-aligned instructional materials, and safe, clean and functional school facilities.

Priority 2: Implementation of State Academic Standards

N/A Annual measure of progress in implementing state academic standards.

Priority 3: Parent and Family Engagement N/A

Annual measure of progress in seeking input from parents in decision making and promoting parental participation in programs.

Priority 4: Student Achievement

• Academic (grades 3–8 and 11)

• English Learner Progress N/A



Table 3: State and Local Indicators Listed by Priority Area (Cont.)

Priority Area State Indicator Local Indicator

Priority 5: Student Engagement

• Graduation Rate • Chronic Absenteeism N/A

Priority 6: School Climate • Suspension Rate

Administration of a local climate survey at least every other year that provides a valid measure of perceptions of school safety and connectedness to students in at least one grade within the grade span(s) that the LEA serves (e.g., K-5, 6-8, 9-12).

Priority 7: Access to a Broad Course of Study N/A

Annual measure of progress on the extent students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study.

Priority 8: Outcomes in a Broad Course of Study

• College/Career N/A

Priority 9: (COEs Only) Coordination of Services for Expelled Students

N/A Annual measure of progress in coordinating instruction for expelled students.

Priority 10: (COEs Only) Coordination of Services for Foster Youth

N/A Annual measure of progress in coordinating services for foster youth.

By reporting performance on multiple measures that impact student performance across the LCFF priorities, the accountability system provides a more complete picture of LEAs and schools, including their accomplishments and challenges. It also promotes equity by clearly identifying the achievement gaps among student groups. For LEAs and schools in need of additional assistance or intervention, the Dashboard will help identify specific areas in need of targeted assistance.



State Indicators

LCFF statute requires that the accountability system include standards for all LCFF priorities. The criteria established for state indicators include: (1) being valid, reliable, and fair measures, (2) having comparable, state-level data, and (3) the ability to disaggregate data by student groups. These criteria ensure a common and comparable way of measuring performance on the indicators across the state. The state indicators apply to all LEAs, schools, student groups (e.g., race/ethnicity, socioeconomically disadvantaged, English learners, students with disabilities, Foster Youth, and Homeless) and progress on the indicators is reported through the Dashboard. Each state indicator is described in detail in the section titled “Dashboard Indicators.” Detailed information will include, in part, technical information on the various calculation methodologies and rules used to calculate each of these indicators.

Local Indicators

Both the “Dashboard Indicators” and the “Overview of the California School Dashboard” sections detail the local indicators, which report LEA results of annual measurement of progress in the state priority areas for which state data is not available in the Dashboard. Local indicators apply only to the LEA and charter school Dashboard; the local indicators do not apply to schools. The “Overview of the California School Dashboard” provides technical information on the local indicators reported in the Dashboard.



Who Gets a Dashboard?

All LEAs and schools, including charter schools and DASS schools,

receive Dashboard reports.

Local Educational Agency-Level Data Alternative (DASS) and Charter Schools

DASS schools are held accountable for the same indicators as non-DASS schools. These schools’ data are “rolled up” or included in their LEA results. Charter schools (both traditional and DASS) are treated as LEAs under the LCFF. Accordingly, charter schools’ data are not “rolled up” or included in the charter authorizing agency’s results. Charters receive school-level reports on the Dashboard.

Differences between the Dashboard and DataQuest Reports Because different rules are used to calculate LEA-level reports between the Dashboard and DataQuest, in most instances, the data within the two reports will not match for the Graduation Rate Indicator, Suspension Rate Indicator, and Chronic Absenteeism Indicator:

• The LEA Dashboard reports: o Does not include charter school data (as noted in the section above) o Uses the DASS graduation rate for DASS schools o Uses the combined four- and five-year graduation rate for comprehensive high

schools

• The LEA DataQuest reports: o Does include charter school data (but can be filtered out) o Uses the four-year graduation rate for DASS schools and comprehensive high

schools In addition, the suspension rates will also differ between DataQuest and the Dashboard because students in non-public schools (NPS) are included in the count in DataQuest, whereas they are excluded in the Dashboard. Exception: When the LEA oversees only charter schools or is a Statewide Benefit Charter, the charter schools’ data are used to determine the district’s performance levels (or colors) on the state indicators. More details on the differences between DataQuest and Dashboard reports can be accessed within each state indicator section.



Dashboard Alternative Schools Status

Eligibility Criteria

In July 2017, the SBE approved eligibility criteria for schools to qualify under Dashboard Alternative School Status (DASS). These criteria distinguish between:

1. Schools that are automatically assigned an alternative status, and 2. Schools that are eligible to apply for alternative status or DASS.

These criteria are further detailed in the section below. Please note that the 2019 Dashboard DASS application deadline closed on August 15, 2019. Accountability coordinators will be notified when the DASS application process opens for the 2020 Dashboard. To access the current list of schools participating in DASS for the 2019 Dashboard, please visit the CDE Active DASS Schools web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/activeschools.asp.

Schools that Are Automatically Assigned an Alternative Status

Schools that meet the following criteria will always be assigned an alternative status and will never have to apply for DASS.

1. School Type Identified in Education Code (EC): Schools that have a school type

identified in EC Section 52052(d) are automatically assigned an alternative status. These schools do not need to apply for DASS. The school types are:

• Continuation • County or District Community Day • Opportunity • County Community • Juvenile Court • County-Run Special Education

2. District-operated Special Education Schools: This represents schools that only

provide services to students with disabilities. If at least 70 percent of the students in grades three through eight and grade eleven participate in the CAA, the school is automatically assigned an alternative status and does not need to apply for DASS.

Schools (under 1 and 2 above) can withdraw from DASS. The withdrawal process is identified later in this section.

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/activeschools.asp



Schools that Are Eligible to Apply for Alternative Status

1. School Population Contains at Least 70 Percent “High-Risk” Students: Schools that serve high-risk students but do not have a school type identified in EC Section 52052(d) can apply for DASS. These schools include: (1) alternative schools of choice and (2) charter schools that serve high-risk students. To be approved for DASS, these schools must have an unduplicated count of at least 70 percent of the school’s total enrollment (upon first entry to the school) comprised of high-risk student groups.

The high-risk student groups includes students who are:

• Expelled (EC Section 48925[b]) including situations in which enforcement of the

expulsion order was suspended (EC Section 48917) • Suspended (EC Section 48925[d]) more than 10 days in a school year • Wards of the Court (Welfare and Institution Code [WIC] Section 601 or 602) or

dependents of the court (WIC Section 300 or 654) • Pregnant and/or Parenting • Recovered Dropouts–the SBE defines recovered dropouts based on EC

Section 52052.3(b) as students who: (1) are designated as dropouts pursuant to the exit and withdraw codes in the CALPADS, or (2) left school and were not enrolled in a school for a period of 180 days

• Habitually Truant (EC Section 48262) or Habitually Insubordinate and

Disorderly whose attendance at the school is directed by a school attendance review board or probation officer (EC Section 48263)

• Retained more than once in kindergarten through grade eight (K–8)

• Credit deficient (i.e., students who are one semester or more behind in the

credits required to graduate on-time, per grade level, from the enrolling school’s credit requirements)

• Gap in enrollment (i.e., students who have not been in any school during the

45 days prior to enrollment in the current school, where the 45 days does not include non-instructional days such as summer break, holiday break, off-track, and other days when a school is closed)

• High level transiency (i.e., students who have been enrolled in three or more

schools during the past academic year or have transferred secondary schools two or more times since entering high school). For example:



o In the same academic year, the student: (1) enrolled in School A and exited; (2) then enrolled in School B and exited; and (3) enrolled in School C. Because the student enrolled in at least three schools during the academic year, the student would be considered having a high level of transiency.

o The student enrolled in School A in grade nine and transferred to School B during that year. In the following year, as a grade ten student, they transferred from School B back to School A. In this scenario, because the student transferred at least two times, the student would be considered having a high level of transiency.

• Foster Youth (EC Section 42238.01[b])

• Homeless Youth

What data should be used to calculate the percentage of high-risk students? Part I of the DASS application requires schools to submit the percent of students who are high-risk. Most of the data needed to calculate this percentage can be determined from CALPADS.

• The denominator is based on the total number of students currently enrolled at your school in CALPADS at the time of completing Part I of the DASS application. Please note that the enrollment is not based on Fall Census data.

• The numerator is based on the number of students who meet the high-risk

definitions approved by the State Board of Education at the time when they first enrolled at the school. (Therefore, a student’s high-risk status at the time when Part I is completed is not used.)

To determine these students, take the students in the denominator and review each student’s CALPADS record, or local data when necessary, when he/she first enrolled at the school. Any student who meets the high-risk definition (see high-risk definitions identified in the bulleted list on the prior page) are included in the numerator.

o Example: When Julio first enrolled at School A, he was NOT a Foster Youth.

However, at the time of completing Part I of the DASS application, Julio was designated as Foster Youth. Because Julio was not a Foster Youth when he first enrolled at the school, he may not be counted as Foster Youth (i.e., not included when calculating the school’s high-risk percentage.)

How often do schools have to re-apply for DASS? Schools that apply for DASS are required to re-certify their high-risk student enrollments every three years. For instance, a school that was approved in August 2019 (to participate in the DASS program starting with the 2019 Dashboard) must reapply in 2021–22 to



continue their participation in the DASS program for the 2022 Dashboard.

Participation Form and Instructions

The DASS participation instructions are posted on the CDE DASS Participation Instructions web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/partinstruct.asp. The participation form will be made available on this web page when the DASS application process opens for the 2020 Dashboard.

Withdrawing from DASS

Any school that does not wish to participate in the DASS may submit a Withdrawal from DASS Participation Form to the CDE. The form and instructions are posted on the CDE DASS Participation/Withdraw Instructions and Forms web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/withdrawinstruct.asp. Schools that submit a withdrawal form are ineligible to participate in DASS for three years.

Dashboard Reporting Timeline and Modified Methods for DASS Schools

DASS schools received their first Dashboard in 2018. These schools are responsible for meeting the same state indicators as non-alternative schools; some of these indicators will be calculated using modified methods that fairly evaluate the performance and progress of these schools. The CDE, in collaboration with the Gardner Center at Stanford University (through a grant from the Stuart Foundation), has convened a California Advisory Task Force on Alternative Schools to develop and recommend alternative indicators to the SSPI. To date, these modified methods include:

• A modified graduation rate for the Graduation Rate Indicator, • College/Career Indicator measures specific for DASS schools, and • Separate cut scores for the Academic Indicator

Details on these modifications are provided under the Graduation Rate Indicator, College/Career Indicator, and Academic Indicator sections within this guide.

Additional Resources on DASS For additional resources relating to DASS, please view the following CDE web pages:

• DASS FAQs: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/dassfaqs.asp • DASS Modified Methods: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/dass.asp - scroll down to the

section titled Modified Methods

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/partinstruct.asp

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/withdrawinstruct.asp

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/dassfaqs.asp

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/dass.asp



How Do You Get a Performance Level (Color)?

In May 2016, the SBE approved the methodology for calculating performance on the state indicators. The adopted methodology, known as the California Model, is two-dimensional and uses two data components: Status and Change.

The California Model

The SBE approved measuring performance for state indicators through a combination of current performance (Status) and improvement over time (Change). Both Status and Change provide equal weight. The approved cut scores for Status and Change serve as the performance standards for the state indicators and are reported as performance levels (or colors).

The performance standards are based on the distribution of Status and Change for each indicator (much like grading on a curve). Therefore, the performance standards vary by indicator and will generally remain fixed, until the SBE decides to update the standards.

For an LEA, school, or student group to receive a performance level (or color), they must have at least two years of data. The most current year of data are used to determine Status. The prior year data are used to determine Change.

Status Levels and Cut Scores For each state indicator, there are five Status levels:

Five Status Levels:

Very High High

Medium Low

Very Low

An LEA, school, or student group’s current year of data are used to assign a Status level for each applicable indicator. For example:

• A school is assigned a “High” Status level for the Graduation Rate Indicator if its

most current year graduation rate falls in the range for the “High” level.

The five Status levels were established for each state indicator through the following process:

1. The data used for each indicator were collected for all LEAs and charter schools

statewide.

2. These results were ordered from highest to lowest.



3. Four cut scores were established based the percentile distributions to create five Status levels.

Change Levels and Cut Scores “Change,” in the California Model, is defined as the difference in results from the current year to the prior year:

Status (Current Year) minus Prior Year = Change

There are five Change levels for each state indicator:

Five Change Levels: Increased Significantly

Increased Maintained Declined

Declined Significantly

Every LEA, school, or student group is assigned a Change level for each applicable state indicator. For example:

• The suspension rate among the white student group declined significantly over the

past year. Therefore, this student group is assigned a Change level of “Declined Significantly” for that indicator.

The five Change levels were established for each state indicator through the following process:

1. The difference in performance was calculated for all LEAs and charter schools

statewide.

2. The calculated results were grouped into two separate distributions:

a. Positive change (ordered from highest to lowest) b. Negative change (ordered from highest to lowest)

3. The two distributions (positive and negative change) were combined.

4. Four cut scores were established to create five Change levels based on percentile

distributions.

Performance Level (or Color) The combination of the five Status levels and the five Change levels results in 25 performance levels displayed in a five-by-five colored table. See Figure 2 for an example of a five-by-five colored table. Each of the 25 performance levels are represented by one of five colors (see Figure 1):



Figure 1: Five Performance Levels (Colors)

A performance level (color) is assigned to an LEA, school, or student group based on their Status and Change performance, which is derived from the use of a five-by-five colored table. (See the following page for the five-by-five table.)

Gauges Throughout the Dashboard, results of state indicators will be reflected using gauges, as illustrated in Figure 1. The first gauge points to blue; the second gauge points to green; the third gauge points to yellow; the fourth gauge points to orange; and the fifth gauge points to red.

The gauges represent performance levels. Each gauge has five-colored segments ranging from Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, and Blue—with an arrow pointing to a specific color (as described in Table 4).

Table 4: Explanation of Gauges

Performance Level Gauge

The Red performance level is represented by a five-segmented gauge with an arrow pointing to the red segment.

The Blue performance level is represented by a five-segmented gauge with an arrow pointing to the blue segment.

To ensure that individuals who are color blind can distinguish the performance levels (or colors), and to allow all viewers to differentiate the performance levels if the Dashboard report is printed in black and white, the name of the color is written below the gauge. The color definitions are explained in detail in the next section.



Five-by-Five Colored Tables As described earlier, an LEA, school, or student group’s performance level (color) is determined through the use of a five-by-five colored table. For instance, an LEA or school with a “High” in Status and an “Increased” in Change will receive an overall performance level of Green for most of the state indicators. See Figure 2 below. Figure 2: How to Get a Performance Level (Color)

Level Declined

Significantly from Prior Year

Declined from Prior

Year

Maintained from Prior

Year

*Increased from Prior

Year

Increased Significantly

from Prior Year Very High in Current

Year Yellow Green Blue *Blue Blue

*High in Current

Year *Orange *Yellow *Green *Green Blue

Medium in Current

Year Orange Orange Yellow Green Green

Low in Current

Year Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow

Very Low in Current

Year Red Red Red Orange Yellow

Automatic Assignment of Orange LEAs and schools are automatically assigned an Orange performance level in the following instances:

• Academic Indicator: LEAs or schools that fail to test at least ten percent of their testing population are automatically assigned an Orange performance level.

• Chronic Absenteeism and Suspension Rate Indicators: LEAs and schools are automatically assigned an Orange performance level if they fail to report or certify attendance or discipline data in CALPADS. Additionally, LEAs and schools receive an Orange performance level for Chronic Absenteeism when there are more out-of-school suspensions than the number of certified absences.

• English Learner Progress: For the 2019 Dashboard, LEAs and schools that failed to

meet the 95 percent participation rate criteria are automatically assigned an ELPI Status of ‘Low’.

See the state indicator sections within this guide for specific details.



Small Populations: Less than 150 Students Select LEAs and schools with small populations were over identified with Red (or Blue) performance levels based on the Spring 2017 Dashboard results. In response, the CDE, in collaboration with various stakeholders, reviewed multiple options to identify a method that would fairly assess LEAs and schools with small populations. In September 2017, the SBE approved an alternative methodology—known as the “Safety Net” or “Three-by-Five” methodology—for assigning performance levels to LEAs or schools that serve small student populations. This methodology limits large swings in the Change data that can be triggered by just a few students. Because over-identification in the Red or Blue performance levels is most prevalent for the Graduation Rate and Suspension Rate Indicators, the three-by-five methodology was only applied to these two indicators for the 2017 Dashboard. In 2018, with reporting the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator for the first time, the SBE approved the application of the three-by-five for this indicator. In July 2019, the SBE approved the application of the three-by-five for the College/Career Indicator.

Applicable at LEA, School, and Student Group Levels

N-Size Is Less than 150 The three-by-five methodology is based on the number of students included in the denominator of the indicator—where the N-size is less than 150—rather than on the number of students enrolled:

• The N-size for the Graduation Rate Indicator and College/Career Indicator is based on the number of students in the: o Combined four- and five-year graduation rate for comprehensive high schools,

or o Grade twelve DASS graduation rate for DASS schools (If N is less than 150, the three-by-five methodology applies.)

• The N-size for the Suspension Rate Indicator is based on the number of students who are aggregately enrolled during the school year. (If N is less than 150, the three-by-five methodology applies.)

• The N-size for the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator is based on the number of

students who meet the chronic absenteeism eligibility enrollment requirements. (If N is less than 150, the three-by-five methodology applies.)



Three-by-Five Methodology

The three-by-five methodology removes both the “Increased Significantly” and “Declined Significantly” Change levels from the performance level determinations. Small student populations will receive only one of three Change levels for the Graduation Rate, Suspension Rate, Chronic Absenteeism, and College/Career Indicators:

• Increased• Maintained• Declined

Applying these changes results in a three-by-five colored tables for the Graduation Rate, Suspension Rate, Chronic Absenteeism, and College/Career Indicators only (rather than a five-by-five colored tables). However, small student populations can still receive any of the five colors. Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6 illustrate the change from a five-by-five colored table to a three-by-five colored table as described above. (Refer to Appendix E for the descriptive text of each figure.)

Figure 3: Three-by-Five Colored Table for Suspension Rate Indicator (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)



Figure 4: Three-by-Five Colored Table for Graduation Rate Indicator (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

Figure 5: Three-by-Five Colored Table for Chronic Absenteeism Indicator (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)



Figure 6: Three-by-Five Colored Table for College/Career Indicator (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

Can an LEA or school have both the five-by-five and three-by-five colored tables applied?

Yes. For instance, if, for the Graduation Rate Indicator, an LEA has over 150 students then the five-by-five colored table will be applied to determine the LEA’s performance level (color). If the same LEA had one student group that had less than 150 students, then the student group will have the three-by-five colored table applied to determine the color.

Is the three-by-five applicable to both non-DASS and DASS schools?

Yes. The three-by-five is applicable to both non-DASS and DASS schools, including all charter schools.

Next Steps

The CDE will continue to monitor the remaining state indicators (ELPI and Academic Indicator) to consider if the three-by-five methodology should be applied.

If the data reveals that it would be appropriate to apply the three-by-five methodology to additional indicators, the CDE will work with the Technical Design Group and stakeholders prior to making a recommendation to the SBE.



Who Gets a Performance Level (Color)?

LEAs, schools, and student groups must have at least 30 or more students in both the current and prior year to receive a performance level or color.

However, the data used to determine the N-size of “30 or more” differs by each state indicator.

Table 5 identifies the data and data sources used to determine the N-size of “30 or more” for the state indicators.

Exception: Foster Youth and HomelessThe number of students needed in the Foster Youth and Homeless student groups to receive a performance level (color) differs at the LEA-level.

• School-level: The N size for both student groups is 30 or more students.Therefore, if the school has 30 or more Foster Youth students or Homelessstudents, each student group will receive a performance level (or color).

• LEA-level: The N size for both student groups is 15 students (not 30).Therefore, if the LEA has 15 or more Foster Youth students or Homelessstudents, each student group will receive a performance level (or color).

Note: Charter Schools are treated as schools (not LEAs) when it comes to reporting these two student groups. Charter schools will need at least 30 or more Foster Youth, or 30 or more Homeless students, to receive a performance level (or color) for each student group.

Less than 30 StudentsThe following business rules are used to report data on the Dashboard:

• Between 11 to 29 Students: LEAs, schools, and students groups that havebetween 11 and 29 students in the denominator, in either the current or prior years,will only have Status and Change data displayed. In these instances, aperformance level (or color) will not be displayed.

• Less than 11 Students: Data for less than 11 students are not displayed on theDashboard to protect the anonymity of the students.



Table 5

State Indicator Data Used to Determine “30 or More” Data Source

Academic (Grades 3 through

8 and Grade 11 in ELA and mathematics)

All students who take the Smarter Balanced Assessments or CAA in grades

3 through 8 and grade 11 who are continuously enrolled* (See Academic Indicator section or Appendix C for the

complete inclusion and exclusion rules.)

CAASPP file from testing vendor

English Learner Progress

All grade 1 through 12 students taking the ELPAC Summative Assessment in the

current year and having an overall performance level in both the current and

prior year.

ELPAC Summative Assessment file from

test vendor

College/Career

All students in the combined four- and five-year graduation rate or the DASS

graduation rate (or the combined graduation rate plus DASS graduation

rate for LEAs).

CALPADS

Chronic Absenteeism

Enrollment (All students who are eligible enrolled or the total number of students who were

enrolled in a school for at least 31 instructional days and attended at least

one day.)

CALPADS

Graduation Rate

All students in the combined four- and five-year graduation rate or the DASS

graduation rate (or combined graduation rate plus DASS graduation rate for LEAs).

CALPADS

Suspension Rate

All students enrolled for at least one day are included in the count to determine the N size. (This is the total count of unique [unduplicated] primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year.)

CALPADS

*Continuous enrollment is defined as enrollment from Fall Census Day (first Wednesday inOctober) to testing without a gap in enrollment of more than 30 consecutive calendar days.



Overview of the California School Dashboard

The Dashboard can be accessed on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/. Upon entering the web site, to see the results for a district or school, type the name into the search bar. Alternatively, the search for a district or school can also be conducted by city or county. Next, select the year. (See Figure 7 below and refer to Appendix E for the figure’s descriptive text.)

Figure 7: Dashboard Landing Page (Refer to Appendix F for descriptive text)

Performance on State and Local Indicators Once you select your district or school, you’ll be able to see its performance on state and local measures. The figure below, Figure 8, is an example for a district. (Refer to Appendix E for the figure’s descriptive text.)

Figure 8: Performance on State and Local Indicators (Refer to Appendix F for descriptive text)

In the example above, the district received a Red performance level for Chronic Absenteeism and a Green performance level for the Suspension Rate. The district received a Yellow performance level for the remaining four state measures—Graduation Rate,

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/



College/Career, ELA, and Mathematics. (Note that schools and districts will not receive a color for English Learner Progress in 2019.) The district also met the standard for all five local indicators.

Student Population General student population data are also available on the main landing page of the Dashboard. See Figure 9 and and refer to Appendix E for the figure’s descriptive text.

Figure 9: Student Population Data on Main Dashboard Landing Page (Refer to Appendix F for descriptive text)

• Enrollment: These data are reflective of CALPADS 2018 Fall Census Day data.At the LEA-level, the data excludes charter school data. For example, an LEA’senrollment data will be based on 2018 Fall Census Day data minus their charterschools’ enrollment data.

o View More Information: This link within Enrollment details thedemographic data, which includes race/ethnicity and program participationstudent groups. These data are also reflective of the 2018 Fall Census Daydata in CALPADS.

• Percentage of Students who are Identified as SocioeconomicallyDisadvantaged, English learners, and Foster Youth: These data are reflectiveof the CALPADS 2018 Fall Census Day data. At the LEA-level, the data excludescharter school data.

• Learn More: By selecting the “Learn More” text, viewers can access the definitionsfor enrollment, socioeconomically disadvantaged, English learners, and FosterYouth. Descriptions for enrollment, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Englishlearners, and Foster Youth can be accessed by selecting the “Learn More” text atthe top of each card. (See Figure 10 on the following page and refer to Appendix Efor the figure’s descriptive text).



Figure 10: Student Population Descriptions (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

Additional Data on Each Measure The Dashboard also provides additional data on each measure, such as school or district results for the current year and whether improvement was made from the prior year. (See Figure 11 and refer to Appendix F for the figure’s descriptive text.) Toggling back and forth between “All Students” and “State” allows you to compare student results for your school or district with statewide results.

Figure 11: Data on Each Measure (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)



Equity Report There is also an Equity Report displayed at the bottom of the card for each state measure. This shows the number of student groups placed in each performance level (color). Figure 12 reflects the Equity Report for the English Language Arts results displayed on the prior page. The data reveals that two student groups received a Red color (the lowest performance level) for ELA, and one student group received a Blue color (the highest level). (Refer to Appendix F for the figure’s descriptive text.)

Figure 12 Equity Report (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

Student Group Performance Selecting the “View More Details” link below the Equity Report will connect the viewer to a page that gives detailed information on how student groups performed on that indicator. Figure 13 is a Student Group Details sample for ELA. (Refer to Appendix F for the figure’s descriptive text.)

Figure 13: Student Group Details (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)



View All Schools Selecting the “View All Schools” link at the top right of an LEA’s report will connect the viewer to a page that gives a snap shot look at how all the schools in the LEA performed on each applicable indicator. Figure 14 is a sample web page for an LEA. (Refer to Appendix F for the figure’s descriptive text.)

Figure 14: Viewing All Schools’ Performance At-a-Glance (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

Local Indicators LCFF statute requires that the accountability system include standards for all LCFF priorities; however, state data is not available for some priority areas identified in the LCFF



statute. For these priority areas, the SBE approved the local indicators, which are based on information collected locally by LEAs. The local indicators apply only at the LEA level, which includes charter schools. These local indicators will appear on the LEA and charter school Dashboard with a status of Met, Not Met, or Not Met for Two or More Years.

For each local indicator the standards approved by the SBE require an LEA to:

1. Annually measure its progress on the local performance indicator based onlocally available data.

2. Report the results at a regularly scheduled public meeting of the local governingboard.

3. Report the results to the public through the Dashboard.

An LEA uses the self-reflection tools included within the Dashboard to report its progress on the local performance indicator to stakeholders and the public.

The self-reflection tools are embedded in the web-based Dashboard system and are also available in Word document format. In addition to using the self-reflection tools to report its progress on the local performance indicators to stakeholders and the public, an LEA may use the self-reflection tools as a resource when reporting results to its local governing board.

If a local educational agency meets the three criteria bulleted above for a local indicator, a rating of Met will be reflected on the Dashboard. If a local educational agency does not complete the self-reflection tool for a local indicator, the Dashboard will show as Not Met or Not Met for Two or More Years, as applicable.

Earning a performance level of Not Met for Two or More Years is a factor in being identified for differentiated assistance.

Please note that all charter schools, including those that are DASS, are required to upload their local indicators.

The self-reflection tools for local indicators 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 can be found in the Dashboard Indicators section. Self-reflection tools for local indicators 9 and 10 can be found in Appendix B.

Table 6 on the following page identifies the seven local indicators that will be reported in the Dashboard by LEAs.



Table 6 LCFF State Priority Description

Priority 1 Appropriately Assigned Teachers, Access to Curriculum- Aligned Instructional Materials, and Safe, Clean and Functional School Facilities

Priority 2 Implementation of State Academic Standards Priority 3 Parent and Family Engagement Priority 6 School Climate – Local Climate Surveys Priority 7 Access to a Broad Course of Study Priority 9 (COEs Only) Coordination of Services for Expelled Students Priority 10 (COEs Only)

Coordination of Services for Foster Youth

Submission Timeline for Local Indicators

For the 2019 Dashboard, LEAs and charter schools’ Dashboard Coordinators must report progress for their local indicators to the Dashboard by November 1, 2019. Failure to meet this deadline will result in a “Not Met” or “Not Met for Two or More Years” rating, as applicable.



Student Groups The Dashboard reports specific student groups as required in California EC Section 52052(a)(2). This section reviews when a student group will receive a performance level (color), when the student group data will be reported (and when it will not), and the specific student group definition.

Student group data is reported in the Dashboard if: • There are 30 or more students in the group for both the current and prior year.

These student groups receive a performance level (color) and the Status/Changedata will be displayed.

Exception: Foster Youth and Homeless: The number of students needed toreport a performance level (color) differs at the LEA level. (See bullet below onLEA-level.)

o School-level: The N size for both student groups is 30 or more students.Therefore, if the school has 30 or more Foster Youth students or Homelessstudents, each student group will receive a performance level (or color).

o LEA-level: The N size for both student groups is 15 students (not 30).Therefore, if the LEA has 15 or more Foster Youth students or Homelessstudents, each student group will receive a performance level (or color).

Note: Charter Schools are treated as schools (not LEAs) when it comes toreporting these two student groups. Charter schools will need at least 30 ormore Foster Youth, or 30 or more Homeless students, to receive aperformance level (or color) for each student group.

• There are 11 to 29 students in the group. These student groups do not receive aperformance level (color) on the Dashboard. However, the Status/Change data willbe displayed.

Student group data are not reported in the Dashboard if:

• A student group has less than 11 students. These student groups do not receivea performance level and their Status/Change data will not be displayed to protectthe anonymity of the students.

The data source used to determine the number of students in each student group varies by each state indicator reported by the CDE.



Student Group Calculation For each student group reported in the Dashboard, the numerator is based on the number of students in the group that meet the performance standards of the indicator. The denominator is based on the total number of students in the group.

Student Groups Reported in the Dashboard Demographic and Program Participation All data used to determine race/ethnicity and program participation are from CALPADS.

For all state indicators, the following race/ethnicity student groups are reported:

• Black or African American• American Indian or Alaska Native• Asian• Filipino• Hispanic or Latino• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander• White• Two or More Races

Students participating in the following programs are also reported for all state indicators:

• English learner (EL)• Socioeconomically Disadvantaged (SED)• Foster Youth: students whose well-being is the responsibility of a court.• Student with Disabilities (SWD)• Homeless

Table 7 on the following page identifies, at-a-glance, the rules used to determine which racial or ethnic student group, or program participation student group, to place students for each state indicator.



Table 7: At-A-Glance: Rules Used to Place Students in Student Groups

State Indicator

Race/ Ethnicity SED EL SWD Homeless Foster Youth

Academic 2019 Smarter

Balanced Summative

Assessments and CAAs

(Grades 3–8 and Grade 11)

Most recent race/

ethnicity at the school or LEA in

EOY 3

SED any time during school year

at the school or LEA in

EOY 3

EL any time during school year, including

students reclassified

within past 4 years (i.e.,

RFEP’d after June 15, 2015)

SWD any time during school year

at the school or LEA in EOY 3, or

took the CAA

Homeless any time

during school year at the

school or LEA in EOY 3

Foster any time during school

year at the school or LEA based on state match or from

local match functionality

Suspension 2018–19

Most recent race/


EOY 3



EOY 3

EL any time during school

year at the school or LEA in

EOY 3



EOY 3

Homeless any time






Chronic Absenteeism

2018–19

Most recent race/


EOY 3



EOY 3



EOY 3



EOY 3

Homeless any time






Combined 4- and 5-Year Graduation

Rate and CCI 2018–19

Most recent race/


ODS

SED any time during the last 4 or 5 years in

high school in ODS

EL any time during the last 4

or 5 years in high school in

ODS

SWD any time during

the last 4 or 5 years in high

school in ODS

Homeless any time

during the last 4 or 5 years

in high school in ODS

Foster any time during the last 4

or 5 years in high school in

ODS

DASS Graduation

Rate and CCI 2018–19

Most recent race/


EOY 3



year


Homeless any time

during school year

Foster any time during school year based on state or local

match

English Learner

Progress (For ELPI, EL

is the only student group

reported.)

Not applicable

Not applicable

Grade 1-12 ELs with an ELPAC

SA overall performance level in the

current and prior year

Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable

CAA = California Alternate Assessments; EOY = End-of-Year; ODS = CALPADS Operational Data Store



Student Group Definitions and Data Source Table 8 below identifies the student group definitions and data source. LEAs and schools are advised to review these data in CALPADS and make corrections prior to the closure of certification submission windows (e.g., Fall 1, Fall 2, EOY 1, EOY 2, and EOY 3). Once the certification windows close, there are no additional opportunities to correct the data for the Dashboard! Table 8

Student Group Student Groups Definitions

Race/ Ethnicity

Students are placed in a specific race/ethnicity based on their most recent CALPADS record at the school/LEA. This information is derived from the student information (SINF) file and:

• Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity Indicator• Race Category Code

The following steps are used to determine which race/ethnicity student group a student is included in:

1. If the CALPADS student record shows Hispanic or Latino in any field, thestudent’s results are included in the Hispanic or Latino student group.

2. If the CALPADS student record shows non-Hispanic or Latino and only onerace, the student’s results are included in the student group of that racialcategory.

3. If the CALPADS student record shows non-Hispanic or Latino and morethan one race, the student’s results are included in the Two or More Racesstudent group.

4. If the CALPADS student record shows blank in all fields, the student’sresults are included in the schoolwide and districtwide data but not in anyrace/ethnicity student group.

Note: • Specific Asian groups (i.e., Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese,

Asian Indian, Laotian, Cambodian, Hmong, or Other Asian) are counted asAsian.

• Native Hawaiian or specific Pacific Islander groups (i.e., Guamanian,Samoan, Tahitian, or Other Pacific Islander) are counted as NativeHawaiian or Pacific Islander.

• If multiple groups are marked in the same racial category (e.g., Chineseand Korean), the student is classified as that category (e.g., Asian), notTwo or More Races.



Table 8 (Continued)

Student Group Student Groups Definitions

SED

Students are SED if they meet one or more of the following criteria at any time during the school year at the school/LEA:

• Student has a Student Program (SPRG) record with an EducationProgram Code of:o 181 – Free meal program; oro 182 – Reduced meal program; oro 135 – Migrant Program; oro 191 – Homeless; or

• Student has been identified in a state-level match as:o Directly certified to receive free or reduced-price meals through

SNAP, TANF, Medi-Cal; oro In foster family placement or in family maintenance; or

• Parent Highest Education Level is “Not a High School Graduate”

EL

Students are EL based on the English Language Acquisition Status information in CALPADS.

For Academic Indicator Only: A student is placed in the EL student group if they were marked as EL at any time during the school year. Students who were reclassified within the past 4 years (i.e., RFEP’d after June 15, 2015) are also included in this student group. The RFEP information can also be accessed using the English Language Acquisition Status information.

SWD

Students are SWD if they: • Took the CAA, or• Had a primary disability code in CALPADS at any time during the

school year at the school/LEA:oPrimary Disability Code is field 3.21 in the Student Program (SPRG)

file.

Homeless Students are placed in the Homeless student group if they have at any time during school year at the school/LEA had a 191 – Homeless record submitted within the SPRG file.

Foster Youth Student has been identified in a state-level match as “in foster placement” or “in family maintenance” or through the local match functionality at any time during school year at the school/LEA.



Additional Student Groups Reported in Academic Indicator

The Academic Indicator reports three additional student groups that are not reported in the other state indicators:

• Current English Learners

• Prior English Learners (Reclassified Fluent-English Proficient Only): ELs who havesufficient English proficiency to be reclassified as a fluent English speaker

• English Only

Note that only Status and Change data will be displayed for these three student groups and performance levels (colors) will not be reported.

Table 9 identifies the rules used to place students in these three student groups. Note that the data used to determine placement in a student group are based from CALPADS.

Table 9

State Indicator Current ELs Prior English Learner

Only (Reclassified-Fluent English Proficient

[RFEP] Only) English Only

Academic 2019 Smarter

Balanced Summative

Assessments and CAA (Grades 3–8

and Grade 11)

EL at any time during school


EOY 3.

Students who are reclassified within the past four years (i.e.,

reclassified after June 15, 2015) at the school

or LEA in EOY 3.

Students who are English Only at the

school or LEA in EOY 3.



LEA and School Type

Because different sets of cut scores and five-by-five colored tables are used to determine performance levels (colors) based on the LEA and school type, it is important that the appropriate “LEA type” and “school type” are identified. The following section explains how the CDE determines “LEA type” and “school type.”

Note that the school type for K–12 schools is not determined. For the purposes of the Suspension Rate Indicator and the Academic Indicator, these schools will have the unified school district cut scores and five-by-five colored table applied.

LEA Type for Reporting Purposes LEA type designations of Unified School District, Elementary School District, and High School District are based off the California School Directory, which are extracted annually on June 30. Specifically, the “district ownership code (DOC)” is used to assign each LEA their type:

• DOC = 52, then the district is designated as an elementary school district• DOC = 56, then the district is designated as a high school district• DOC = 00, 03, or 54, then the district is designated as an unified school district

For Dashboard purposes, county offices of education are assigned a Unified School District type.

Single school districts are assigned an elementary or high school district type based on their school type. For example, if the school type for a single school district is “Elementary,” then their district type is “Elementary School District.”

School Type for Reporting Purposes School type designations of elementary, middle, and high are based off the California School Directory, which are also extracted annually on June 30. The “educational institution level code” (EIL) is mainly used to assign each school their type.

Any school labeled in EIL as “Ungraded” or “Elementary High” will have their school type determined by the information in the “school ownership code (SOC),” which is also available in the California School Directory:

• SOC = 60 or 61, then the school is designated as elementary• SOC = 62 or 64, then the school is designated as middle• SOC = 66, 67, or 68, then then the school is designated as high

Schools that have no information in the “educational institution level code” or “school ownership code,” such as K–12 schools, will be assigned the unified school district type.



Dashboard Indicators

The Dashboard reports the performance levels (colors) of each state indicator. These performance levels are used to identify strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement and to determine whether LEAs are eligible for technical assistance.

The Dashboard reports state and local indicators into three categories that are illustrated below. This section covers each state indicator as they appear in the order of the Dashboard. It includes the calculation methods and data sources used to determine the performance level for each indicator.

Academic Performance • ELA and Mathematics (State Indicator)• English Learner Progress (State Indicator)• College/Career Indicator (State Indicator)• Implementation of Academic Standards (Local Indicator Priority #2)

Academic Engagement • Chronic Absenteeism (State Indicator)• Graduation Rate (State Indicator)• Access to a Broad Course of Study (Local Indicator Priority #7)

Conditions & Climate • Suspension Rate (State Indicator)• Basic Teachers, Instructional Materials, Facilities (Local Indicator Priority #1)• Parent Engagement (Local Indicator Priority #3)• Local Climate Survey (Local Indicator Priority #6)



Academic PerformanceAcademic Indicator

English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics (Grades 3–8 and Grade 11)

Changes for this Indicator Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, the following changes are reflected within this indicator:

1. California Alternate Assessments (CAAs) are now included in the calculationof Distance from Standard (DFS). The methodology used to incorporate the CAAinto the Academic Indicator was approved by the SBE in September 2019.

2. Separate Status cut scores for DASS schools for the Very Low and LowStatus levels were approved by the SBE in September 2019.

3. The district of residence rule is now applied to all students with disabilities(SWDs), regardless of where they receive services.

The changes noted above will be discussed in detail throughout this section.

Who Receives this Indicator? The Academic Indicator is based on the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments results for ELA and mathematics and applies to LEAs and schools with grades three through eight and/or grade eleven.

• Participation Rate: LEAs, schools, and student groups that have 11 or morestudents enrolled during the testing window will have the participation calculatedfor both ELA and mathematics. All students eligible to participate in either theSmarter Balanced Summative Assessments or CAAs are included in the countfor the participation rate.

• Distance from Standard (DFS): LEAs, schools, and student groups that have30 or more students continuously enrolled will have Status, Change, and aperformance level (color) for this indicator. Results for both the SmarterBalanced Summative Assessments and CAAs are included in the DFScalculations.

Schools that serve kindergarten, grade one, and/or grade two will also receive a DFS but will not receive participation rates. (See the section “Pair and Share” for more details.)



Data Source Results from the CAASPP assessments, which include the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAAs for grades three through eight and grade eleven, are received from the testing vendor. Student group determinations are taken from CALPADS. See section on student groups in the guide to access the rules.

Differences between CAASPP and Dashboard

1. Percent of Students in Each Achievement Level versus Distance from Standard.The CAASPP web site reports the number and percent of students in each achievementlevel (i.e., four levels for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and three levelsfor the CAAs). These results are based on all students who took the test regardless of thenumber of days enrolled at the tested entity.

The Dashboard, on the other hand, reports DFS, which measures the averagedistance between students; scores on the CAASPP and the standard metachievement level (i.e., the lowest threshold score for Level 3). As detailed underthe DFS section in this guide, students are included in the DFS only if they arecontinuously enrolled.

2. Test Completion Rates versus Participation Rates. Under CAASPP, LEAs are able toaccess test completion rates, which is based on the total number of students who tookthe test at a given school. These completion rates are not the same as the participationrates that are calculated for the Dashboard.

The participation rate for the Dashboard only includes students enrolled during the“accountability testing window.” This accountability window includes the application ofgrace periods, which hold an LEA/school harmless when there is inadequate time toadminister the assessments. In addition, because ESSA requires 95 percentparticipation on the assessments, LEAs, schools, or student groups that do not meet the95 percent participation goal will see a decrease in their DFS. (The percentage pointsneeded to bring the rate to 95 percent is multiplied by 0.25, and that number issubtracted from the DFS.)

3. Medical Emergency and District of Residence. Additional differences between the tworeports result from the application of the following condition codes and rules:

• Medical Emergency: For CAASPP, students are included in the denominator of thetest completion rates. Conversely, the Dashboard removes these students from thedenominator of the participation rates and DFS.

• District of Residence. SWDs oftentimes receive services from another LEA, specialeducation school, or non-public school (NPS). Under CASSPP, test results are sentback to the district of residence (or district of special education accountability) only ifthe student is enrolled at an NPS. However, for the Dashboard, test results are sent



back to the district of residence regardless of where the student was sent to receive special education services.

Specific details on the rules used for the Dashboard are found in this section of the guide.

Participation Rate Beginning in 2018, the participation rate was included in the reporting of the Academic Indicator. The federal ESSA requires states to test at least 95 percent of all students and student groups in ELA and mathematics, and to factor the participation rate into their accountability systems. If a school, LEA, or student group does not meet the 95 percent participation rate, the number of students needed to meet the participation rate must be factored into the Academic Indicator results, as explained later in this section.

Failure to meet the 95 percent goal will cause a negative adjustment to the DFS.

Who Is Held Responsible for the 95 Percent Participation Rate Goal?

All LEAs and schools (including charter and DASS schools) that serve students in grades three through eight and grade eleven, as well as student groups represented in these grade levels, are responsible for meeting the 95 percent participation target.

Because LEAs, schools, and student groups have Status data reported if they have at least 11 students, the participation rate will affect entities with at least 11 students who are continuously enrolled and tested (i.e., have a DFS calculated). (See the section titled “Distance from Standard” for more details.)

Which Content Areas Are Used to Calculate the Participation Rate? For accountability purposes, the participation rate is calculated for ELA and mathematics only. All LEAs, schools, and student groups are required to meet the 95 percent participation rate for these two content areas on both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAAs.

While the CDE will report the participation rate for the California Science Test (CAST) to the ED, the participation rate for this assessment is not incorporated in the 2019 Dashboard.

Which Students Are Automatically Removed from the Participation Rate Calculations? The following students are not included in the calculations of the participation rate; therefore, these students’ data will not impact the Academic Indicator of the LEA, school, or student group. (Note that the bulleted rules below applies to both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and the CAAs.)

• Medical Emergency: Students who are absent from testing due to a significantmedical emergency, and are flagged with the medical emergency condition code onthe CAASPP file, are excluded from calculations for the participation rate. Student



records marked as “not tested due to significant medical emergency” (condition code NTE) will be automatically removed, unless the student logged onto the test.

Per California Code of Regulations, Title 5, medical emergency is defined as: “a significant injury, trauma, or illness (mental or physical) that precludes a pupil from taking the achievement tests. An injury, trauma, or illness is significant if the pupil has been determined by a licensed physician to be unable to participate in the tests.”

For the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments, any student who logs on to both the computer adaptive test (CAT) and performance task (PT) for the same content area (ELA or mathematics) will be counted in the participation rate, regardless of the student’s condition code.

Similarly, any student who logs on to the CAAs will be counted in the participation rate, regardless of the student’s condition code.

• English Learners (ELs) New to the Country: ELs who have been enrolled in a U.S.school for less than one year are exempt from taking the ELA portion of the SmarterBalanced Summative Assessments and the CAA. For accountability purposes, any ELnewcomer who enrolled in a U.S. school after April 15, 2018, will automatically beremoved from the calculation of the ELA participation rate even if the student optedto take one or both parts of the ELA assessment. (Note that this rule was firstimplemented with the 2018 Dashboard. It is a change from prior year business rules.In prior years, EL newcomers were included in the ELA participation rate if the studentchoose to participate in the ELA assessment, or if the student was unintentionallyadministered one or both parts of the ELA assessment.)

The date that an EL newcomer enrolls at a school is taken from CALPADS, specificallyfield #2.36 (“Student Initial US School Enrollment Date”) from the Student Information(SINF) file.

Note: All EL students (regardless of whether they have been enrolled in a U.S. schoolfor less than one year) are expected to take the mathematics assessments and willbe included in the mathematics participation rate.

Do Parent Waivers Exempt Students from the Participation Rate Calculations? No. Because the ED does not recognize parent waivers, students who do not take the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments or CAAs due to a parent waiver are still included in the denominator of the participation rate. (They are, however, excluded from the numerator, meaning that they are counted as “not participating.”)

Are “Pair and Share” Schools Held Responsible for the 95 Percent Participation Rate Goal?

No. The ESSA State Plan only requires schools that serve kindergarten, grade one, and/or grade two to receive a DFS. Therefore, these schools will receive a DFS but they will not



receive participation rates and will not be held responsible for meeting the 95 percent participation rate goal.

Calculating the Participation Rate Participation Rate Formula

Total Number of Students Tested (Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAAs)

divided by

Total Number of Students Enrolled During the Testing Window

Whole number rounding is used for the participation rate. Therefore, an LEA, school, or student group that has a calculated participation rate of

94.1 percent or above will be rounded to 95 percent.

The sections below provide further details on determining which students are included in the numerator (tested) and denominator (enrolled) of the participation rate.

Determining the Accountability Testing Window

Prior to calculating the participation rate, a school’s accountability testing window must be determined. Although LEAs set their own testing window for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAAs in the TOMS Test Administration Setup module, for accountability purposes, the following steps are taken to determine a school’s accountability testing window:

Step 1: Determine the Start of a Testing Window: For purposes of the Dashboard, a school's testing window begins when the first student at a school logged on to either the CAT or the PT in ELA or math. The first log on could be for either a Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments (in CAT or PT), or it could be logging on to the CAAs.

Step 2: Determine the End of the Testing Window: The end of the testing window is the end date of the testing window that is determined by the LEA when their LEA CAASSP Coordinator sets the window dates in the TOMS Test Administration Setup module.

Step 3: Apply Grace Periods: Because some students transfer in or out during a school's determined testing window, grace periods were developed. These grace periods apply only to certain students who transfer in and/or out during the testing window and hold schools harmless when there is inadequate time to administer the assessments.

Depending on the length of the window determined in steps 1 and 2 above, one or two grace periods are applied. These grace periods are "calendar days," meaning that weekends and holidays are included in the count. The following rules are used to apply grace periods:



• Testing Window is 14 Calendar Days or Less: Schools with a testing window of14 calendar days or less do not have any grace periods. In this instance, the 14days (or less) is the accountability testing window.

• Testing Window is 15 to 30 Calendar Days: Schools with a testing window of 15to 30 calendar days have one 14-day grace period applied at the end of the testingwindow (e.g., 14 days before the testing window ends, which includes the very lastday of the testing window).

• Testing Window is 31 or More Calendar Days: Schools with a testing window of31 or more calendar days have two 14-day grace periods: one at the beginning ofthe testing window (e.g., 14 days after the testing window begins, including thevery first day of the testing window) and one at the end (e.g., 14 days before thetesting window ends, which includes the very last day of the testing window).

Step 4: Determine the Accountability Testing Window: The accountability testing window is the period between the two grace periods. However, only students who enroll during the second grace period are exempt from being tested. Figure 15 illustrates the differences among the testing window, grace periods, and accountability testing window. (Refer to Appendix E for the figure’s descriptive text.)

Figure 15: How to Determine the Accountability Testing Window (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

Determining the Participation Rate Denominator: Enrolled

Students who are enrolled during a school's determined testing window, and do not transfer in or out during this window, are included in the enrolled count (i.e., included in the participation rate denominator).

Students Who Transfer In or Out

Students who do not test will be excluded or included in a school's participation rate based



on when the student transferred in or out.

• Transfer In: Referencing the preceding diagram, schools are responsible fortesting students who transfer in either during the beginning 14-day grace period orduring the Accountability Testing Window. These students will be included in theenrolled count (i.e., included in the participation rate denominator).

However, schools are not responsible for testing students who transfer in duringthe ending 14-day grace period. These students will not be included in the enrolledcount if they were not tested (i.e., not included in the participation rate denominator).

• Transfer Out: Still referencing the preceding diagram, schools are not responsiblefor testing students who transfer out during the beginning 14-day grace period.These students will not be included in the enrolled count (i.e., not included in theparticipation rate denominator) if they were not tested.

However, schools are responsible for testing students who transfer out eitherduring the Accountability Testing Window or during the ending 14-day grace period.These students will be included in the enrolled count (i.e., included in theparticipation rate denominator), whether or not they were tested.

Who Is Held Responsible if a Student Transfers? Table 9 provides scenarios in which students are included or excluded from the participation rate calculations. It also identifies which school is held responsible when a student transfers.

Table 9

Example Jefferson City Junior High (JCJH)

Carson City Middle School (CCMS) Participation Rate Determination

1

Student exits during the beginning grace period and

never enrolls at another school. The student has not yet taken any of the Smarter

Balanced Summative Assessments.

(Does Not Enroll)

Due to the grace period applied at the beginning of testing, the student will

not be included in JCJH’s participation rate (neither in the denominator nor the

numerator).





2

Student exits during the accountability testing window and never enrolls at another school. The student has not yet taken any of the Smarter

Balanced Summative Assessments.

(Does Not Enroll)

Because the student exited JCJH during the accountability testing

window and never enrolled in another school, the student will be included in JCJH’s denominator for both the ELA and mathematics participation rates.

However, the student will not be included in the numerator, since the

student did not participate in the assessments.

3

Student completes the ELA PT but exits during the

beginning grace period before completing the remaining

Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments.

Student enrolls during the beginning

grace period, completes the

mathematics CAT and PT, but does not

complete the ELA CAT.

Because the student enrolled at CCMS during the beginning grace period,

CCMS is responsible for administering the ELA CAT, mathematics CAT, and

mathematics PT to the student.

For the mathematics participation rate, the student will be included in both the numerator and denominator for CCMS. For ELA participation, the student will be included only in the denominator

because the ELA CAT was not completed.

4

Student completes the ELA CAT and PT, and

mathematics CAT but exits during the accountability testing window before

completing the mathematics PT.

Student enrolls during the

accountability testing window.

Because the student completed the ELA CAT and PT at JCJH, the student

will be included in JCJH’s ELA participation rate (in both the numerator

and denominator).

Because the student enrolled at CCMS during the accountability testing

window, CCMS is responsible for administering the mathematics PT to

the student. The student will be included in CCMS’s mathematics

participation rate.

5

Student completes ELA CAT and PT, and mathematics

CAT and PT, and exits during the accountability testing

window.

Student enrolls during the


Because the student completed all Smarter Balanced Summative

Assessments at JCJH, the student will be included in JCJH’s ELA and

mathematics participation rates (in both the numerator and denominator).





6

Student exits during the accountability testing window. The student has not yet taken any of the Smarter Balanced

Summative Assessments.

Student enrolls during the end grace period and does not

take any tests.

Because the student enrolled at CCMS during the end grace period, the

student will not be included in CCMS’s participation rates.

However, the student will be included in the denominator of JCJH’s ELA and

mathematics participation rates because the student transferred after the beginning grace period and during

the accountability testing window.

7 Student completes the ELA

CAT and PT and mathematics PT and exits during the


Student enrolls during the end grace period and does not

complete the mathematics CAT.

Because the student enrolled at CCMS during the end grace period, the

student will not be included in CCMS’s mathematics participation rate.

However, the student will be included in JCJH’s ELA participation rate (in both

the denominator and numerator), and in the denominator for the mathematics participation rate because the student

did not complete the mathematics CAT.

District of Residence Rule for Students with Disabilities

At the LEA-level only, an additional step—application of the district of residence rule—is taken to determine which SWDs are enrolled and included in the denominator of an LEA’s participation rate. This rule is not applied at the school-level. All schools are held accountable for the students they serve (i.e., the schools where the students attend).

Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, all SWDs who receive special education services at another LEA will have their assessment results “sent back” to the district where they reside (i.e., the “district of residence”). As a result, the district of residence is held accountable for these students, and they will be included in that district’s participation rate and DFS. This section defines and details this business rule.

Prior Business Rule

In prior Dashboard reports (and under “Adequate Yearly Progress,” the former federal accountability system), SWDs who received services from: (1) other special education schools in another district or county office of education or (2) non-public schools (NPS) had their assessment results “sent back” to the district of residence. The district of residence was held responsible for the student’s assessment results.



Updated Business Rule

To align the state’s accountability system with the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which requires states to monitor LEAs where the SWD resides, all SWDs, regardless of where they receive their special education services, will have their assessment results sent back to the district of residence, which will be held responsible for their students’ assessment results. This rule will be applied beginning with the 2019 Dashboard.

• Example: Aliyah is enrolled at Opal School District. Based on her IndividualizedEducation Plan (IEP), Opal District cannot provide the appropriate services to herand sets up a memorandum of understanding with Diamond School District,located in the next neighboring county. Aliyah then enrolls at Diamond SchoolDistrict to receive appropriate special education services. That spring, Aliyah takesthe Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments at Diamond School District.

Although Diamond District administered the assessment to Aliyah, it is OpalDistrict, the district of residence, that is held accountable for her results. The CDEwill therefore send Aliyah’s test results back to Opal School District.

District of Residence = District of Special Education Accountability (DSEA) Field in CALPADS

To identify which district is the district of residence and should be held accountable, the “District of Special Education Accountability” field in CALPADS is used.

CALPADS Field Name

CALPADS Field Number

CALPADS Record Comments

District of Special

Education Accountability

#3.22 Student Program (SPRG)

This data element was extracted from the CALPADS EOY on September 6, 2019 for

the 2019 Dashboard.

Note that beginning September 10, 2019, LEAs will no longer be able to submit special education related data on the SPRG record. In 2019–20, LEAs will submit the DSEA in a new Special

Education file that will come directly from local special education data systems.

Which LEA is Responsible for Reporting the District of Special Education Accountability Data? Since SWDs often attend school in one LEA and receive services from another LEA or COE, it can be unclear which LEA is required to report special education data to CALPADS. The responsible LEA for reporting enrollment and special education data to CALPADS is the



“Reporting LEA” or the LEA where the student “attends school” or receives the majority of his or her instruction.

The District of Special Education Accountability is the LEA ultimately responsible for the student and held accountable for the student on the Dashboard. In most instances, the Reporting LEA and the DSEA are the same for accountability purposes, as are the DSEA and the District of Geographic Residence. However, note that the District of Geographic Residence field in CALPADS is used for LCFF funding purposes and is not the DSEA field.

Table 10 provides the most common scenarios for determining which LEA is responsible for reporting SWD data, and which LEA will be held accountable on the Dashboard. A full comprehensive list of scenarios will be posted on the CDE CALPADS web page.

Table 10: Common Scenarios for Determining Which LEA is Held Accountable

Scenario If the

student resides in:

And the student is

attending a school in:

And the student receives special

education services

from:

Then the LEA that

reports data for the SWD

is:

And the District of

Special Education

Accountability is:

1 District A District A District A District A District A 2 District A District A District B District A District A

3 District A District B per the IEP District B District B District A

4 District A

District B per an inter-

district transfer

agreement

District B District B District B

Does the district of residence rule impact schools?

No. The rule is only applied at the district level. All schools (i.e., schools providing the special education service and where the student attends) are held accountable for their SWDs, and these students are included in their Dashboard reports.

Which district is the district of residence (or DSEA) when students transfer via a formal inter-district transfer, attend a charter school, attend a private school, or are wards of the court?

• For inter-district transfers: The DSEA is the district that the student transfers to. SeeScenario 4 above in Table 10.

• For charter schools: Because charter schools are treated as LEAs under LCFF, thecharter school is held accountable and is the DSEA. (Note that the charter school’sauthorizer is not held accountable.)



• For juvenile court and court/community: The DSEA is the LEA serving the studentwhile the student is incarcerated or institutionalized.

Does the district of residence rule apply only to the Academic Indicator?

Yes. For the 2019 Dashboard, the rule only applies to the Academic Indicator. This rule does not apply to the remaining state indicators:

• Suspension• Chronic Absenteeism• Graduation Rate• College/Career Indicator• English Learner Progress

Table 11 below identifies which entity is held accountable for SWDs for the 2019 Dashboard.

Table 11

State Indicator

School of Attendance

District of Residence (District of

Special Education

Accountability)

District of Attendance

Charter School

Charter School

Authorizer

Academic Responsible Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible

Suspension Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Responsible Not Responsible

Chronic Absenteeism Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible

Graduation Rate Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible

CCI Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Responsible Not Responsible

ELPI Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Responsible Not Responsible

Note that this rule will be expanded to the remaining state indicators beginning with the 2020 Dashboard. See Next Steps at the end of the Academic Indicator section.



Does the district of residence rule apply only to students with disabilities? Or, does the rule apply to all students?

The rule only applies to SWDs. For the Academic Indicator, an SWD is a student who:

• Took the CAAs, or• Has a primary disability code in CALPADS

(See the Student Groups section in this guide to access the student group definitions.)

Determining the Participation Rate Numerator: Tested

To be considered as "participating," and included as tested, a student must:

• Be "enrolled,” and

• Log on to both parts (CAT and PT) of the test in the same content area (for theSmarter Balanced Summative Assessments) or have a test completion date, or

• Log on to the test for the CAA

For example, for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments, if a student logs on to the ELA CAT and does not log on to the ELA PT, the student would be counted as "not participating" in the ELA assessment and excluded from the numerator. Similarly, if a student logs on to the PT only for both content areas and not the CAT, the student would be counted as "not participating" (or excluded from the numerator) in both ELA and mathematics.

Are students who used an accommodation, modification, or unlisted resource included or excluded from the participation rate?

• Students who use an accommodation or modification on the Smarter BalancedSummative Assessments are included in the calculation of the participation rate (aswell as the DFS).

• Students who use an unlisted resource that changes the construct of the SmarterBalanced Summative Assessments are considered as “not tested” or “notparticipating”. Therefore, these students are excluded from the numerator and includedin the denominator of the participation rate. (Because these students are considered“not participating,” they are excluded from the calculations of the DFS.)

How Are LEA Participation Rates Calculated?

Each LEA’s participation rates are calculated by aggregating all of its schools’ participation rate data (i.e., all the schools’ enrolled and tested students are aggregated to the LEA level). The only schools not aggregated are charter schools.

• Charter Schools: Because all charter schools are treated as LEAs under the LocalControl Funding Formula, their data are not included in their authorizing agencies’participation rates.



• DASS Schools: These schools’ data will be included in their LEAs’ Dashboard reportfor each state indicator. Therefore, their participation data are included in their LEAs’participation rates.

Distance from Standard (DFS) Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, the DFS is calculated for both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and the CAAs. Due to the requirements under ESSA that all assessment results, including the CAAs, be included in states’ accountability systems, the SBE approved, at its September 2019 meeting, the inclusion of the CAAs into the Academic Indicator. The sections below detail how the DFS is calculated for each assessment.

Which Content Areas Are Used to Calculate DFS? Similar to the participation rate, the DFS is calculated for ELA and mathematics only. Both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and the CAAs are used to calculate the DFS at the LEA, school, and student group levels. (Note that the California Science Test [CAST] is not included in the DFS.)

Which Students Are Excluded from the DFS Calculations? The following students are not included in the calculations of the DFS; therefore, these students’ data will not impact the Academic Indicator for the LEA, school, or student group.

• Medical Emergency: Students who are absent from testing due to a significantmedical emergency, and are flagged with the medical emergency condition code on theCAASPP file, will not be included in the DFS calculation for the Academic Indicator.Student records marked as “not tested due to significant medical emergency” (conditioncode NTE) will automatically be removed, unless the student logged onto the test. Anystudent who logs onto both the CAT and PT, or logged on to the CAA, and iscontinuously enrolled, will be included in the calculations of the DFS regardless of thestudent’s condition code. This rule applies to both the Smarter Balanced SummativeAssessments and the CAAs. (For the definition of medical emergency, refer to thesection titled “Which Students Are Automatically Removed from the Participation RateCalculations?”)

• English Learners (ELs) New to the Country: ELs who have been enrolled in a U.S.school for less than one year are excluded from the calculations of the DFS. Therefore,for accountability purposes, any EL newcomer who enrolled in a U.S. school after April15, 2018, are not included in the DFS calculations for both ELA and mathematics.This rule applies to both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and the CAAs.



Which Students Are Included in the DFS Calculations? To be included in the DFS calculations, students must be continuously enrolled. Students who are not continuously enrolled are automatically removed from the calculations.

• Continuous enrollment is defined as enrollment from Fall Census Day [first Wednesdayin October] to when the student logged on to the test (CAT or PT) without a gap ofmore than 30 consecutive calendar days.

Therefore, a student who enrolls in a school or LEA after Fall Census Day will be considered not continuously enrolled and will be excluded from the DFS.

The continuous enrollment calculation is conducted separately at the school and LEA level. Thus, a student may not be continuously enrolled at a school but could be continuously enrolled at the LEA.

Parent Waivers Students who do not take the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments or the CAAs due to a parent waiver are excluded from the calculations of the DFS. (However, these students are included in the calculation of the participation rate [i.e., included in the denominator but excluded from the numerator]. See the earlier section on participation rates.)

DFS for Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments

The DFS represents the distance between a student’s score on the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and the Standard Met Achievement Level threshold (i.e., the lower threshold of the scale score range for Level 3). The scale score ranges for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments vary by content area–ELA and mathematics–and grade level and are available in Appendix D.

The calculation uses all available scale scores to provide a more precise measure of an LEA’s and school’s status and progress. Each student’s DFS is calculated separately and then all of the distances are combined to determine an average. The average distance is calculated for each LEA, school, and student group. These results will show which areas are in need of improvement and the extent to which the average student score falls short of, or exceeds, the Level 3 threshold.

Because the scale score ranges for each performance level differ for each grade level, it is important to compare each student’s ELA and mathematics scores against the Level 3 scale score for the appropriate grade. For example:

• In grade five, the scale scores for ELA range from 2201 to 2701. The scale scores formathematics range from 2219 to 2700. Within each range, there are four distinctachievement levels. See Table 12 on the following page.



Table 12: Grade Five Scale Score Range for Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments in ELA and Mathematics

Achievement Levels

Level 1: Standard Not Met

Level 2: Standard

Nearly Met

Level 3: Standard

Met

Level 4: Standard Exceeded

Grade 5 ELA Scale Score

Ranges2201–2441 2442–2501 2502–2581 2582–2701

Grade 5 Math Scale Score

Ranges 2219–2454 2455–2527 2528–2578 2579–2700

As noted in Table 12, above:

• For ELA, the lowest scale score for Level 3 is 2502. Each grade five ELA assessmentscore is compared against this fixed point to obtain the DFS.

• For mathematics, the lowest scale score for Level 3 is 2528. Each grade fivemathematics assessment score is compared against this fixed point to obtain the DFS.

Table 13 below provides examples of how the DFS is calculated for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments.

Table 13: Examples of Calculating the DFS for Grade 5 Student

Student

Student’s Score on the

Smarter Balanced

Summative Assessments

Smarter Balanced Summative

Assessments Scale Score

Range for Level 3

Distance from Standard (DFS)

Grade 5 Student 1

ELA Score: 2552

ELA Scale Score Range:

2502 – 2581

2552 minus 2502 = 50 points

The student scored 50 points above the lowest possible Level 3 scale score in Grade 5 ELA. The

DFS is positive 50 points.

Grade 5 Student 2

Math Score: 2505

Math Scale Score Range:

2528 – 2578

2505 minus 2528 = -23 points

The student scored 23 points below the lowest possible Level 3

scale score in Grade 5 mathematics. The DFS is

negative 23 points.



No Scale Score on the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments

Students who have a record in the CAASPP file but do not have a scale score result will automatically be assigned the minimum scale score for their grade level. This means that they will be assigned the lowest obtainable scale score (LOSS) at the Standard Not Met level. For example, a student in grade five who was continuously enrolled, logged onto the CAT and PT for mathematics, but did not answer enough questions, would not have a scale score for mathematics. This student would automatically receive a score of 2219, which is the lowest possible score for grade five mathematics. The 2219 would be used to calculate the student’s DFS.

DFS for California Alternate Assessments The ED requires the inclusion of the CAA results in the calculation of the DFS. In September 2019, the SBE approved the calculation methodology to include the CAA results into the DFS.

Unlike students who take the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments, who are evaluated against meeting the California Common Core State Standards (CA CCSS) and placed in one of four achievement levels, students who take the CAA are evaluated against their level of understanding in one of three achievement levels related to alternate achievement standards linked to the CA CCSS. These two assessments also have different reporting scales.

Table 14 below provides the CAA scale score ranges for each performance level for Grade 6.

Table 14: Grade Six Scale Score Range for CAAs for ELA and Mathematics

Achievement Levels

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Grade 6 ELA Scale Score

Ranges600–644 645–659 660–699

Grade 6 Math Scale Score

Ranges 600–644 645–659 660–699

The complete scale score ranges for the CAAs are available in Appendix E. Note that the scale score ranges are the same for both content areas.

After reviewing three different approaches to incorporating the CAA results into the DFS calculations, in September 2019, the SBE approved the “top-of-the-range” approach:

• Top-of-the Range: For levels 1–3 on the CAA, a student’s CAA score would besubstituted with the top score point for the same Smarter Balanced Summative



Assessments achievement level.

o Example: A grade three student scoring anywhere in Level 2 on the CAA forELA would receive a score of 2431, which is the highest Level 2 SmarterBalanced Summative Assessments score for grade three ELA. This SmarterBalanced Summative Assessments score would then be used to calculate thestudent’s DFS by comparing the student’s score against the lowest Level 3scale score for Grade 3 ELA, which is 2432.

2432 (grade 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments lowest scale score)minus 2,431 (CAA student’s substituted Smarter Balanced Summative

Assessments score) = -1 point

The “top-of-the-range” approach also excludes CAA students who have the lowest obtainable scale score (LOSS). This is because the vast number of students with a LOSS score are unable to orient or respond to the test.

Table 15 below provides examples of how the DFS is calculated for the CAAs.

Table 15: Examples of Calculating the DFS for Grade 6 Student

Student Student’s Score on

CAAs

CAA Scale Score Range

Smarter Balanced

Summative Assessments Scale Score

Range

Distance from Standard

Grade 6 Student 1

ELA Score: 659

ELA Grade 6 Scale Score Range for Level 2:

645 – 659

ELA Grade 6 Scale Score

Range for Level 2: 2457 – 2530

Because the student’s ELA score was within Level 2, the student receives the

highest score on the Level 2 Smarter Balanced

Summative Assessments range for Grade 6 ELA,

which is 2530. This score is compared against the lowest

Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments

Level 3 scale score for Grade 6 ELA (2,531).

2,530 minus 2531 = -1 point

The student scored 1 point below the lowest possible

Level 3 scale score in Grade 6 ELA. The DFS is negative

1 point.



Table 15 (Continued)

Student Student’s Score on

CAAs

CAA Scale Score Range

Smarter Balanced

Summative Assessments Scale Score

Range


Grade 6 Student 2

Math Score: 622

Math Grade 6 Scale Score Range for Level 1:

600 – 644

Math Grade 6 Scale Score

Range for Level 1: 2235 – 2472

Because the student’s math score was within Level 1, the student receives the highest score on the Level 1 Smarter

Balanced Summative Assessments range for Grade 6 mathematics, which is 2472.

This score is compared against the lowest Smarter

Balanced Summative Assessments Level 3 scale

score for grade 6 mathematics (2552).

2472 minus 2552 = -80 points

The student scored 80 points below the lowest possible Level

3 scale score in Grade 6 mathematics. The DFS is

negative 80 points.

No Scale Score and LOSS on the California Alternate Assessments

CAA records in the CAASPP file that reflect a LOSS or no scale score will automatically be removed from the calculations of the DFS.

Calculate DFS for LEA, School, or Student Group

Once the DFS is calculated for each student, all DFS calculations are aggregated and averaged together to determine the DFS for the LEA, school, or student group.

Can the Participation Rate Reduce the DFS?

Yes. The participation rate reduces the DFS only if the LEA, school, or student group did not meet the participation goal of 95 percent. If the participation target is not met, the following steps are applied:



Steps on How the Participation Rate Reduces the DFS

1. Calculate the participation rate for each district, school, and student group, and foreach subject area. This is based on participation in both the Smarter BalancedSummative Assessments and the CAA

2. Calculate the percentage points that a district, school, or student group is below the 95percent participation rate target

3. Multiply that number by ¼ (or 0.25)

4. Subtract from DFS

Example: Emerald Elementary School tested 79 percent of its students on the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAA for ELA. It is 16 percentage points short of meeting the 95 percent participation target (95 – 79 = 16). If the school’s DFS is 18.9, the participation rate reduction on the DFS is:

16 x 0.25 = 4 points Reduce the school’s DFS by 4 points.

18.9 minus 4 = 14.9

The new adjusted DFS for Emerald Elementary is 14.9 for ELA.

Is the Participation Rate Calculated for Student Groups?

Yes. The participation rate is calculated at the LEA, school, and student group levels. The same calculation and business rules apply to all three levels.

How Many Students Are Needed to Report the Impact of Participation Rate on DFS?

There needs to be at least 11 students to report data. Therefore, any LEA, school, or student group with 11 or more students who do not meet the 95 percent participation rate will have a DFS reported, on the Dashboard, with the participation rate reduction applied.

Will the Participation Rates Be Reported on the Dashboard? No. However, participation rates are available on the CDE School Dashboard Additional Reports and Data web page at https://www6.cde.ca.gov/californiamodel/ –select the participation rate report. The participation rates, including the reduction made to the DFS based on the participation rates, are also available in the downloadable data files. (To access these files, see Data Files and Guide tab on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page.)

https://www6.cde.ca.gov/californiamodel/



Calculation Formula for Status for K–8 and K–12 LEAs, Schools, and Student Groups

Step 1: Calculate Distance from Standard:

Sum of All Grades 3 through 8 or Grades 3 through 8 plus 11 Students’ Distance from Standard on the 2019 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments or CAAs Valid Scores*

divided by

Total Number of 2019 Grades 3 through 8 or Grades 3 through 8 plus 11 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments or CAAs Valid Scores*

Step 2: Calculate the Participation Rate Reduction, if Applicable

Take the total percentage points that an LEA, school, or student group falls short of the 95 percent participation rate target and multiply it by 0.25.

Step 3: Calculate Status

Step 1 (DFS) minus Step 2 (Participation Rate Reduction) = Current Year Status

*Specific inclusion and exclusion rules, such as continuous enrollment, are applied to determine the numeratorand denominator of calculating the DFS, which are detailed in this section and Appendix C.

Calculation Formula for Status for High Schools (Grades 7 – 12) and High School Districts

Step 1: Calculate Distance from Standard:

Sum of All Grades 7, 8, and/or 11 Students’ Distance from Standard on the 2019 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments or CAAs Valid Scores*

divided by

Total Number of 2018 Grade 7, 8, and/or 11 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments or CAAs Valid Scores*

Step 2: Calculate the Participation Rate Reduction, if Applicable

Take the total percentage points that an LEA, school, or student group falls short of the 95 percent participation rate target and multiply it by 0.25.


Step 1 (DFS) minus Step 2 (Participation Rate Reduction) = Current Year Status *Specific inclusion and exclusion rules, such as continuous enrollment, are applied to determine the numeratorand denominator, which are detailed in this section and Appendix C.



Calculation Formula for Change for All LEAs and Schools

Current Year Status (2019) minus Prior Year Status (2018)

Federal Requirement: Pair and Share For K, 1, and/or 2 Schools ONLY

Based on California’s ESSA State Plan, schools that serve kindergarten, grade one, and/or grade two only (non-testing grades) are required to receive a performance level (color) on the Academic Indicator even though students in these grades are not administered the ELA and mathematics assessments. The process of assigning DFS results to these schools is called “Pair and Share.” These schools are specifically assigned grade three DFS (which includes results from both the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and the CAAs) using the following rules:

• Schools that Serve Kindergarten and/or Grade One Only: These schools’ DFS willbe based on the district’s grade three DFS results. For charter schools with a countyauthorizer, the DFS will be based on the countywide grade three DFS results.

• Schools that Serve Grade Two Only, Kindergarten through Grade Two Only, orGrades One through Two Only: These schools’ DFS will be based on the gradethree DFS results of the school(s) where the grade two students matriculate to. Thedistrict or school informs the CDE of the matriculation patterns for up to three schools.The following is an example of how the Pair and Share is calculated.

Example: Upon graduating from Jade Elementary School, the grade two students matriculate each year to three different area schools:

• 40% enroll in Opal Elementary• 50% enroll in Topaz Elementary• 10% enroll in Gem Elementary

First, the grade three DFS is calculated separately for each school. Next, the weighted average is calculated:

(40% x Opal’s DFS) + (50% x Topaz’s DFS) + (10% x Gem’s DFS) = DFS for Jade Elementary School

This process is calculated separately for ELA and math.

• New Schools: Because new schools do not have matriculation data, they will be“paired” with its authorizing/operating district or county. Their DFS will be based on theauthorizer/operating district or countywide average grade three DFS results.



Do Pair and Share Schools Receive Student Group Data?

No. These schools only receive Status, Change, and performance levels (colors) at the school-level. They do not receive student group data.

Do Schools Have to Report Matriculation Patterns Each Year? No. The matriculation patterns received by schools that serve grade two students are effective for at least three Dashboard cycles. However, this may change if the school informs the CDE, or if the CDE becomes aware that the school has changed grade spans, the number of students enrolled, or matriculation patterns.

When Are Schools No Longer “Paired and Shared”? Any school that adds a grade three and has grade three assessment results will no longer be held to the Pair and Share arrangement. These schools will have an Academic Indicator based on their own test results.

My school is K–5. Does “Pair and Share” apply to my school?

No. Schools that administer the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments to students will receive an Academic Indicator based on their own students’ results. Therefore, for a K-5 school, their Academic Indicator will be based on their grades three through five results.

What Data Will Be Reported on the Dashboard for Pair and Share Schools?

• Pair and Share schools that serve less than 11 students in their highest grade will notreceive an Academic Indicator and no data will be reported on the Dashboard.

• Pair and Share schools that have between 11 and 29 students in their grade willreceive Status and Change data but will not receive a performance level (color).

• Pair and Share schools that have at least 30 students in their highest grade willreceive Status, Change, and a performance level (color) for the Academic Indicator onthe Dashboard.

The 2018–19 Fall Census Day data was used to determine the number of students (i.e., less than 11 students, 11–29 students, or 30 or more students).

Does Pair and Share Apply to Any Other State Indicators? No. The federal Pair and Share requirement only applies to the Academic Indicator. The data for the other state indicators are based on these schools’ own data.

Automatic Assignment of an Orange Performance Level Education Code Section 60641(a)(1) requires all LEAs to annually administer the CAASPP to all students. In addition, the federal ESSA requires states to hold all schools accountable for their academic achievement based on their progress towards proficiency in ELA and mathematics. To meet these requirements, beginning with the 2018 Dashboard, all LEAs, schools, and significant student groups will automatically be assigned an Orange performance level if they have:



• At least 30 students enrolled* in both the current year and prior year, and

• Less than ten percent of enrolled* students were tested in either the current or prioryear.

* Enrollment, for accountability purposes, includes students who are eligible to take either theSmarter Balanced Summative Assessments or CAAs. See the section on “Calculating theParticipation Rate” for details on how the enrollment is determined.

The automatic assignment of Orange is determined separately for ELA and math. Therefore, if a school tested 51 percent of students in ELA but only nine percent in mathematics, the school will receive a performance level in ELA based on its own test results but will automatically be assigned an Orange performance level in mathematics for testing less than ten percent.

Schools that newly opened during the 2018–19 academic year, and tested less than ten percent of their enrolled students in ELA and/or mathematics during that year, will be assigned an Orange performance level (color) on the 2020 Dashboard. Because color determinations require two years of data, the assignment of the Orange performance level occurs when a school is in operation for two assessment cycles.

The downloadable data files identify which LEAs or schools were assigned an Orange performance color. These data files can be accessed on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ - see Data Files and Guide tab. The “notestflag” field identifies LEAs and schools that receive an automatic Orange performance level for this indicator.

Cut Scores and Five-by-Five Colored Tables

Separate cut scores have been set for the Academic Indicator:

• Cut Scores by Type: Separate cut scores have been set for this indicator based on districtand school type. See the section titled “LEA and School Type” for the rules used to determinean LEA and school’s type. Table 16 below identifies the cut scores applied by type:Table 16

Grades 3-8 Cut Scores Grade 11 Cut Scores Elementary School High School (serving grades 7–12 )

Middle School High School District K–12 School (blank)

Elementary School District (blank) Unified School District (blank)

Note that for unified school districts and K–12 schools, the grade eleven results are combined with the grades three through eight results to calculate one Academic Indicator for ELA and one Academic Indicator for mathematics.




• Cut Scores for DASS: At the September 2019 SBE meeting, a separate set of cutscores for Very Low and Low Status levels were approved for DASS schools forthe Academic Indicator.

Based on these differences, Appendix A contains the statewide distributions, cut scores, and five-by-five colored tables for non-DASS schools, DASS schools, and LEAs for:

1) Grades three through eight (elementary schools, K–12 schools, and unified schooldistricts), and

2) Grade eleven (7–12 high schools and high school districts).

Student Groups and Data Collection Please view the section titled “Student Groups” to access the student group definitions and data collection processes and deadlines for this indicator.

Examples on How to Calculate the Participation Rate and Distance from Standard

Example 1: Blue Sapphire School (Serves Kindergarten through Grade Five)

Step 1: Determine the School’s Testing Window

a. First, take only the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAA recordsfrom the 2019 CAASPP file from the testing vendor.

b. Next, determine the start of the testing window by identifying the first student whologged on to either the CAT or PT for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessmentsor the CAT for the CAA (in either ELA or mathematics). Based on the Blue Sapphire’sCAASPP file from the testing vendor, the first student who logged on was for the CAAin mathematics on April 1, 2019.

The school’s beginning testing window is April 1, 2019.

c. Determine the end of the testing window by using the assigned testing window that isidentified for each student record in the CAASPP file from the testing vendor andreflects the end date selected by the LEA CAASPP Coordinator in the TOMS TestAdministration Setup module. For Blue Sapphire School, the end date for all of theirstudents in the CAASPP data file was May 31, 2019.

The school’s end testing window is May 31, 2019.

Step 2: Determine the School’s Accountability Testing Window

a. Apply one 14-day grace period at the beginning of the testing window (e.g., 14 daysafter the test window begins, which includes the very first day of the testing window)



and one 14-day grace period at the end of the testing window (e.g., 14 days before the test window ends, which includes the very last day of the testing window).

The school’s accountability testing window are the days between the grace periods from April 15, 2019 to May 17, 2019.

Step 3: Calculate the ELA Participation Rate

For the 2018–19 school year, Blue Sapphire School had a total enrollment of 150 students. After establishing the school’s accountability testing window, it was determined that 100 students were enrolled in grades three through eight. Of these students, 80 logged on to both the CAT and PT for the ELA Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and 10 logged on to the ELA CAAs. This equals 90 tested students.

Based on the enrolled and tested figures, the school’s ELA participation rate is 90 percent. (See the participation rate section for the full business rules.)

90 (tested) divided by 100 (enrolled) = 90 percent participation rate for ELA.

Step 4: Calculate the DFS for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments

a. First, take all 2019 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments test results in ELAand remove all records for: (1) ELs who were enrolled in a U.S. school for less thanone year, (2) students who were not continuously enrolled, and (3) students flaggedwith a medical emergency. The remaining records reflect the total number of validscores. (See Appendix C and earlier sections for the complete inclusion/exclusionbusiness rules used to determine the numerator and denominator.)

b. Next, calculate the DFS for each valid score. Be sure to use the appropriate scalescore for each grade. For example:

• Grade 3 Scale Score Range for Level 3: 2,432 to 2,489Take each valid ELA scale score results and calculate the distance from 2,432.Example: Joe scored 2,430. The calculated distance is:

2,430 minus 2,432 = -2 (or 2 points below Standard)

• Grade 4 Scale Score Range for Level 3: 2,473 to 2,532Take each valid ELA scale score results and calculate the distance from 2,473.Example: Jane scored 2,483. The calculated distance is:

2,483 minus 2,473 = 10 (or 10 points above Standard)

• Grade 5 Scale Score Range for Level 3: 2,502 to 2,581Take each valid ELA scale score results and calculate the distance from 2,502.Example: Earl scored 2,532. The calculated distance is:




Step 5: Calculate the DFS for California Alternate Assessments

a. First, take all 2019 CAA test results in ELA and remove all records for: (1) ELs who were enrolled in a U.S. school for less than one year, (2) students who were not continuously enrolled, and (3) students flagged with a medical emergency. The remaining records reflect the total number of valid scores. (See Appendix C and earlier sections for the complete inclusion/exclusion business rules used to determine the numerator and denominator.)

b. Next, calculate the DFS for each valid score. Be sure to use the appropriate scale score for each grade:

• Grade 3

Take each valid ELA scale score results and substitute the score with the top score of the same Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments achievement level. Example: Kiera scored 338 (Level 1) on the CAA. Substitute this score with the “top-of-the range” grade three Level 1 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ELA score, which is 2,366. Compare this score against the lowest grade three Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ELA score, which is 2,432. The calculated distance is:

2,366 minus 2,432 = -66 (or 66 below Standard)

• Grade 4 Take each valid ELA scale score results and substitute the score with the top score of the same Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments achievement level. Example: Kevan scored 446 (Level 2) on the CAA. Substitute this score with the “top-of-the range” grade four Level 2 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ELA score, which is 2,472. Compare this score against the lowest grade four Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ELA score, which is 2,473. The calculated distance is:

2,472 minus 2,473 = -1 (or 1 point below Standard)

• Grade 5 Take each valid ELA scale score results and substitute the score with the top score of the same Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments achievement level. Example: Marcos scored 460 (Level 3) on the CAA. Substitute this score with the “top-of-the range” grade five Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ELA score, which is 2,581. Compare this score against the lowest grade five Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ELA score, which is 2,502. The calculated distance is:




Step 6: Calculate the DFS for the LEA, School, or Student Group

a. First, add all of the distances calculated for each valid score in Steps 4b and 5b. For instance, taking the distances calculated for Joe, Jane, Earl, Kiera, Kevan, and Marcos above:

(-2) + (10) + (30) + (-66) + (-1) + (79) = 50 points

b. Divide sum of distances (number obtained in Step 6a) by total number of valid Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAA scores. (This number was determined in Steps 4a and 5a.) Keeping with the examples for Joe, Jane, Earl, Kiera, Kevan, and Marcos:

50 points (Step 6a) divided by 6 (Step 4a and 5a) = 8.3 points

The school’s average is 8.3 above Standard.


a. Take the school’s participation rate (Step 3) and determine how many percentage points short it is from the 95 percent participation target:

95 percent federal target minus 90 percent actual participation rate = 5 percentage points short

b. Next, determine the number of points by which the school’s DFS will be reduced.

Each percentage point that the school falls short, the DFS is reduced by 0.25 points.

5 percentage points short (Step 7a) multiplied by 0.25 = 1.25 points reduction

c. Finally, determine Status (using the examples for Joe, Jane, Earl, Kiera, Kevan, and Marcos):

8.3 DFS (Step 6b) minus 1.25 participation rate reduction = 7.05, which is 7.1 DFS

using standard rounding rules

7.1 DFS is the Status for Blue Sapphire School.

Note that for simplicity purposes, the DFS calculation in this example used only six students. For the Dashboard, an LEA, school, or student group would need at least 11 students to have a DFS calculated and reported.

Step 8: Calculate Change

• Current Year Status: 7.1 points • Prior Year Status: 8.5 points • Change Calculation: Difference Between Current Year Status to Prior Year Status:

7.1 minus 8.5 = -1.4 points

Blue Sapphire School decreased by 1.4 points on their EL Academic Indicator.



Step 9: Determine Performance Level (Color)

Based on the school’s Status and Change results, 7.1 points and -1.4 points respectively, the school’s performance level for the Academic Indicator is “Yellow” as illustrated in the ELA five-by-five colored table below.

Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Example 1 (Blue Sapphire School)

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by more than 15

points)

Declined from Prior

Year (by 3 to 15 points)

Maintained from Prior Year

(declined by less than 3 points or

increased by less than 3 points)

Increased from Prior

Year (by 3 to less than 15

points)

Increased Significantly from Prior

Year (by 15 points or

more)Very High

+45 points orhigher in

Current Year Green Green Blue Blue Blue

High +10 to +44.9

points inCurrent Year

Green Green Green Green Blue

Medium -5 points to

+9.9 points inCurrent Year

Yellow Yellow Yellow Green Green

Low -5.1 to -70points in

Current Year Orange Orange Orange Yellow Yellow

Very Low -70.1 points or

lower in CurrentYear

Red Red Red Orange Orange



Example 2: Peridot High School (Serves Grades Nine through Twelve)

Step 1: Determine the School’s Testing Window

a. First, take only the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAA records fromthe 2019 CAASPP file from the testing vendor.

b. Next, determine the start of the testing window by identifying the first student whologged on to either the CAT or PT for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessmentsor the CAT for the CAA (in either ELA or mathematics). Based on the Peridot High’sCAASPP file from the testing vendor, the first student who logged on to a CAT or PTwas a student who took the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments ELA PT onMarch 19, 2019.

The school’s beginning testing window is March 19, 2019.

c. Determine the end of the testing window by using the assigned testing window that isidentified for each student record in the CAASPP file from the testing vendor andreflects the end date selected by the LEA CAASPP Coordinator in the TOMS TestAdministration Setup module. For Peridot High School, the end testing window for allof their students in the CAASPP data file was April 30, 2019.

The school’s end testing window is April 30, 2019.

Step 2: Determine the School’s Accountability Testing Window

a. Apply one 14-day grace period at the beginning of the testing window (e.g., 14 daysafter the test window begins, which includes the first day of the testing window) andone 14-day grace period at the end of the testing window (e.g., 14 days before thetest window ends, which includes the very last day of the testing window).

The school’s accountability testing window is from April 2, 2019 to April 16, 2019.

Step 3: Calculate the Mathematics Participation Rate

For the 2018–19 school year, Peridot High School had a total enrollment of 900 students. After establishing the school’s accountability testing window, it was determined that, 250 students were enrolled in grade eleven. Of these students,135 logged on to both the CAT and PT for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments for mathematics, and 15 logged on to the CAA for mathematics. This equals 150 students as tested.

Based on the enrolled and tested figures, the school’s mathematics participation rate is 60 percent. (See the participation rate section for the full business rules.)

150 (tested) divided by 250 (enrolled) = 60 percent particaiption rate for mathematics.



Step 4: Calculate the DFS for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments

a. First, take all grade eleven 2019 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments results inmathematics and remove all records for: (1) ELs who were enrolled in a U.S. schoolfor less than one year (Note: Although these students are not exempt from taking themathematics assessment, their scores are not included in DFS calculations), (2)students who were not continuously enrolled, and (3) students flagged with a medicalemergency. The remaining records reflect the total number of valid scores. (SeeAppendix C and earlier sections for the complete inclusion/exclusion business rulesused to determine the numerator and denominator.)

b. Next, calculate the DFS for each student. Be sure to use the grade eleven SmarterBalanced Summative Assessments scale scores. For example:

• Example of calculating the DFS for Grade 11 Mathematics:The scale score range for Mathematics Level 3 (Standard Met) is 2,628 to 2,717.Take each valid mathematics scale score results and calculate the distance from2,628.

Example 1: Tom scored 2,700. The calculated distance is:2,700 minus 2,628 = 72 points above Standard.

Example 2: Jerry scored 2,500. The calculated distance is: 2,500 minus 2,528 = 28 points below Standard.

Example 3: Agatha scored 2,638. The calculated distance is: 2,638 minus 2,628 = 10 points above Standard.

Step 5: Calculate the DFS for California Alternate Assessments

a. First, take all 2019 CAA test results in mathematics and remove all records for: (1)ELs who were enrolled in a U.S. school for less than one year (Note: Although thesestudents are not exempt from taking the mathematics assessment, their scores arenot included in DFS calculations), (2) students who were not continuously enrolled,and (3) students flagged with a medical emergency. The remaining records reflect thetotal number of valid scores. (See Appendix C and earlier sections for the completeinclusion/exclusion business rules used to determine the numerator anddenominator.)

b. Next, calculate the Distance from Standard for each valid score.

• Examples of calculating the DFS for Grade 11 Mathematics:Take each valid mathematics scale score results on the CAA and substitute thescore with the top score of the same Smarter Balanced Summative Assessmentsachievement level.

Example 1: Ava scored 910 (Level 1). Substitute this score with the “top-of-therange” grade eleven Level 1 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments math



score, which is 2,542. Compare this score to the lowest grade three Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments math score, which is 2,628. The calculated distance is:

2,542 minus 2,628 = -86 points (or 86 points below Standard)

Example 2: Aixa scored 962 (Level 3). Substitute this score with the “top-of-the range” grade eleven Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments math score, which is 2,717. Compare this score to the lowest grade eleven Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments math score, which is 2,628. The calculated distance is:

2,717 minus 2,628 = 89 points (or 89 points above Standard) Example 3: Dallas scored 950 (Level 2). Substitute this score with the “top-of-the range” grade eleven Level 2 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments math score, which is 2,627. Compare this score to the lowest grade eleven Level 3 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments math score, which is 2,628. The calculated distance is:

2,627 minus 2,628 = -1 points (or 1 point below Standard) Step 6: Calculate the DFS for the LEA, School, or Student Group

a. First, add all of the distances calculated for each student in Steps 4b and 5b. Taking the distances calculated for Tom, Jerry, Agatha, Ava, Aixa, and Dallas above:

(72) + (-28) + (10) + (-86) + (89) + (-1) = 56 points

b. Divide sum of distances (number obtained in Step 6a) by total number of valid Smarter

Balanced Summative Assessments and CAA scores. (This number was determined in Steps 4a and 5a.) Keeping with the examples for Tom, Jerry, Agatha, Ava, Aixa, and Dallas:

56 points (Step 6a) divided by 6 (Step 5a) = 9.33, which is 9.3 DFS using standard rounding rules

The school’s average is 9.3 points above Standard.


a. Take the school’s participation rate (Step 3) and determine how many percentage points short it is from the 95 percent participation target:

95 percent federal target minus 60 percent actual participation rate = 35 percentage points short

b. Next, determine the number of points by which the school’s DFS will be reduced. Each



percentage point that the school falls short, the DFS is reduced by 0.25 points.

35 percentage points short (Step 7a) multiplied by 0.25 = 8.75 points reduction

c. Finally, determine Status (using the examples for Tom, Jerry, Agatha, Ava, Aixa, and Dallas):

9.3 DFS (Step 6b) minus 8.75 participation rate reduction = 0.55 or 0.6 DFS

0.6 DFS is the Status for Peridot High School.

Note that for simplicity purposes, the DFS calculation in this example used only six students. For the Dashboard, an LEA, school, or student group would need at least 11 students to have a DFS calculated and reported. Step 8: Calculate Change

• Current Year Status: 0.6 points • Prior Year Status: 5 points • Change Calculation: Difference Between Current Year Status to Prior Year Status:

0.6 minus 5 = -4.4 points

Peridot High School decreased by 4.4 points on the Mathematics Academic Indicator.


Upon combining the school’s Status and Change results, 0.6 points and -4.4 points respectively, the school’s performance level for the Mathematics Academic Indicator is determined as “Green” using the mathematics grade eleven five-by-five colored table as illustrated on the following page.



Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Example 2 (Peridot High School)

Performance Level

Declined Significantly from Prior Year (by

more than 15 points)

Declined from Prior



(declined or increased by 2.9 points or

less)

Increased from Prior Year (by 3 to less than 14.9 points)



more) Very High

+25 points or higher in

Current Year

Green Green Blue Blue Blue

High 0 to +24.9 points in

Current Year


Medium -0.1 to -60.0

points in Current Year


Low -60.1 to -115


Orange Orange Orange Yellow Yellow

Very Low -115.1 points

or lower in Current Year


`

Next Steps California Science Test As data become available for the new California Science Test (CAST), which is based on the California Next Generation Science Standards (CA NGSS) for California Public Schools, the CDE will continue to consult with the SBE regarding when it is feasible to include these results in the Dashboard. Growth Model Over the past several years, California has made bold strides in developing its K–12 multiple measures accountability and support system. The state’s education leaders have acknowledged that just as schools and districts seek stakeholder feedback and use this to guide their continuous improvement, the state, too, must model meaningful engagement with



stakeholders to identify ways to continuously improve the system to better serve California’s districts, schools, educators, parents, and students. As one potential area for improvement, stakeholders and policy makers have focused on incorporating a measure of individual student growth (commonly referred to as “a growth model”) within California’s accountability system, and the state is investigating options for doing so. In January 2019, CDE will instruct its Smarter Balanced assessment contractor, Educational Testing Service (ETS), to conduct analyses of individual student growth. The results of the modeling will be presented to the Technical Design Group (TDG), and then CDE and ETS will refine the modeling based on TDG feedback. Then, the updated modeling will be presented to the TDG. CDE plans to reconvene the Growth Model Stakeholder Group, in person or virtually, to present an update from the technical work. The May SBE meeting will have an item on a measure of individual student growth. CDE staff will conduct presentations to various stakeholders (TDG, LCFF stakeholders, and California Practitioners Advisory Group) during the late spring and early summer. SBE action regarding including a growth indicator will occur at either the July or September SBE meetings. Independent of the decision on a growth measure, LEAs will be able to preview the Dashboard in November, and the public will see the release of the 2020 Dashboard in December. Revisions to the Participation Rate Reduction The U.S. Department of Education (ED) has determined that the current participation rate reduction methodology does not meet ESSA requirements. The ED required that the LOSS be assigned for each student needed to bring the school-, district-, and student-group-level participation rate up to 95 percent. Although the ED requested that this new requirement be applied for the 2019 Dashboard, the CDE will not apply it until the 2020 Dashboard. The proposed new methodology entails the following steps:

1. Determine the number of additional students needed to reach a 95 percent participation rate.

2. Assign these additional students a predetermined LOSS.

3. Incorporate the new LOSS scores into the DFS. How is the predetermined LOSS determined and assigned?

• Because the LOSS varies at each grade level, the distance between the lowest scale score for Level 3 to a LOSS varies as well. The lowest distance from LOSS will be applied to all LEAs, schools, and student groups for ELA and mathematics. For example, the lowest distance from LOSS calculated for all grade levels in ELA is -279. This -279 will be applied to all LEAs, schools, and student groups regardless of whether they serve grade eight.

• Example: An elementary school serving grades K–6 had an ELA participation rate



of 94 percent. Three additional students would be needed to bring the ELA participation rate up to 95 percent. Each of the three students—regardless of their grade level(s)—would be assigned the ELA LOSS score of 2,288, which gives each student a DFS of -279.

The CDE has begun notifying stakeholders and LEAs on the new ED directive and will actively reach out to all LEAs over the new few months so that they can appropriately plan for the spring 2020 testing administration.

Expanding the District of Residence Rule to All State Indicators

Beginning with the 2020 Dashboard, the district of residence rule will be applied to the remaining state indicators. Therefore, all SWDs who receive special education services at another district or county office of education will have their results for all state indicators “sent back” to the district of residence (i.e., district of special education accountability). Table 17 on the following page identifies the entity responsible for each state indicator as it relates to SWDs.

Table 17: Entity Accountable for SWDs for the 2020 Dashboard

State Indicator

School of Attendance

District of Residence (District of

Special Education

Accountability)

District of Attendance

Charter School

Charter School

Authorizer

Academic Responsible Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible

Suspension Responsible Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible

Chronic Absenteeism Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible Responsible Not Responsible

Graduation Rate Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible Responsible Not Responsible

CCI Responsible Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible

ELPI Responsible Responsible Not Responsible Responsible Not

Responsible



Academic Performance

College/Career Indicator (Grades 9 – 12)

Changes for this Indicator

Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, the following changes are reflected within this indicator: • Using the combined four-and five-year graduation rate for comprehensive high

schools. As noted under the section on the Graduation Rate Indicator, the SBE approved, at its July 2019 meeting, the use of a combined four-and five-year graduation rate beginning with the 2019 Dashboard. This combined rate is applied to comprehensive high schools and LEAs that have comprehensive high schools. Because students counted in the Graduation Rate Indicator are used to calculate the CCI, students included in the combined rate will now be used to calculate the CCI for comprehensive high schools. (The DASS graduation rate will continue to be used to calculate the CCI for DASS schools.)

• Approval of the three-by-five colored table. At the July 2019 SBE meeting, the SBE approved the application of the three-by-five for the CCI. Therefore, when the number of students in the combined four-and five-year graduation rate and/or the DASS graduation rate is 149 or less, the three-by-five methodology will automatically be applied. For further details regarding the three-by-five, please see the section in the guide titled “Small Populations: Less than 150 Students.”

The changes noted above will be discussed in detail throughout this section. Who Receives this Indicator? All LEAs, schools, and student groups that have 30 or more students in the combined four-and five-year graduation rate and/or the DASS graduation rate (in the current Status and prior year Status) will receive a CCI. Due to ESSA requirements, all students, including students who take the CAAs, are included in the CCI.

Data Sources This indicator uses various college and career measures that evaluate a student’s preparedness for success after high school. Table 19 identifies the data source and the data amendment windows for the 2019 Dashboard.



Explaining the College/Career Indicator A high school diploma should represent the completion of a broad and rigorous course of study. The CCI was designed to encourage high schools to provide all students with a rigorous broad course of study that will lead to likely success after high school. It recognizes that students pursue various options, whether completing: (a) a Career Technical Education (CTE) Pathway, (b) course requirements for a-g, or (c) a course of study specifically designed to meet the student’s individual interests. In May 2019, the SBE held a special study session on the CCI. One of the objectives of this session was to agree on a vision for the CCI that would help guide the continued development of the indicator. The SBE indicated that it is the responsibilities of schools and districts to provide all students with a broad course of study that prepares them to leave high school with the ability to choose to pursue college and career. Students decide at the end of high school which path to pursue but are fully prepared for either path. College/Career Indicator Measures Only measures currently collected statewide at an individual student level are included in the CCI. They are:

• CTE Pathway Completion • Grade 11 Smarter Balanced Assessments (Smarter Balanced Summative

Assessments) in ELA and Mathematics • Advanced Placement (AP) Exams • International Baccalaureate (IB) Exams • College Credit Course (formerly called Dual Enrollment) • a-g Completion • State Seal of Biliteracy • Leadership/Military Science

Table 18 describes each measure. Table 18: Description of the CCI Measures

Measure Description

CTE Pathway Completion

A CTE pathway completion consists of:

1. Finishing a sequence of courses totaling at least 300 hours, and 2. Completing a capstone course, with a grade of C minus or better

The number of courses in a sequence varies from LEA to LEA. One LEA may require a sequence of two courses totaling 300 hours while another may require a sequence of four courses totaling 300 or more hours. (Note: CTE concentrators are excluded from the CCI.)



Measure Description

Grade 11 Smarter Balanced

Summative Assessments in

ELA and Mathematics

In grade eleven, students participate in the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments. The results indicate whether students are ready for college-level work in ELA and mathematics. The following four achievement levels in the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments are used to determine which students are included in “Approaching Prepared” or “Prepared” levels of the CCI: • Standard Exceeded • Standard Met • Standard Nearly Met • Standard Not Met

Because the combined four-and five-year graduation rate is used for non-DASS schools and the DASS graduation rate is used for DASS schools, graduates could have taken the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments at different points of time. For example, for the combined graduation rate, fourth-year graduates in the Class of 2019 took the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments as grade eleven students in 2018. Fifth-year graduates in the Class of 2018 took the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments as grade eleven students in 2017. The prior three years (i.e., 2017, 2018, and 2019) of Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments data will be used for all students included in the CCI. The best score across all three years is used for each student regardless of the graduating class the student belongs to.

AP Exams The College Board offers AP exams in 38 subjects. Exams are scored on a scale of one to five, where a score of three or higher is considered passing by The College Board. Students do not have to be enrolled in an AP course to take an AP exam. All AP exams are used for the CCI; no exams are excluded. LEAs and schools will receive credit for any student who passes two AP exams at any point in time during high school.

IB Exams Students participate in the IB starting in grade eleven. The IB offers six subject area exams which are graded on a scale of one to seven. A score of four is considered passing by the IB. All IB exams are used for the CCI; no exams are excluded. LEAs and schools will receive credit for any student who passes two IB exams during grade eleven or twelve.



Measure Description

College Credit Course (formerly known as Dual

Enrollment)

Students who pass a college-level course with a grade of C minus or better and earn college credits upon completion of the course are considered for the CCI. Courses may be in either academic disciplines (e.g., English) or CTE disciplines (e.g., welding). For purposes of the CCI, physical education courses are not counted. Students must complete a minimum number of semesters, quarters, or trimesters of college coursework to be placed in either the Prepared or Approaching Prepared level. The college-level course does not have to be taken in sequential order. For example, three classes taken during one fall quarter will be counted as completing three quarters of college coursework. One class taken during the fall semester and one class taken during the spring semester will be counted as completing two semesters of college coursework. In both examples, the school will receive credit as long as the student: (1) passed the courses with a grade of C minus or better and (2) earned college credits upon completion of the course. Year-long and summer courses are also counted for this measure. One full year term is equivalent to one semester. One summer term is equivalent to one quarter.

a-g Completion Students who complete either University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU) a-g requirements with a grade C minus or better are identified as completing a-g.

State Seal of Biliteracy

The State Seal of Biliteracy recognizes high school graduates who have attained a high level of proficiency in speaking, reading, and writing one or more languages in addition to English. Requirements are detailed at https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/er/documents/criteriaflyer.docx. LEAs and schools will receive credit for any student who earns a State Seal of Biliteracy and receives at least a “Standard Met” (or Level 3) in ELA on the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments.

https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/er/documents/criteriaflyer.docx



Measure Description

Leadership/ Military Science

In leadership/military science, students participate in a physical conditioning program aimed at promoting military values and military precision in group activities, such as rifle corps or marching squad. For secondary students, this course also brings together information from other subject areas, and relates these skills and knowledge to a military setting. Examples include engine mechanics, electricity or electronics, and aviation technique. Another example, such as Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC), also fall under the leadership/military science measure.

Students can participate in this program for all four years in high school. LEAs and schools will receive credit for any student who completes two or more years of this course with a C minus or better.

Addition and Removal of Measures

The CCI Model has been developed to allow for the addition of new measures and the removal of measures as they become obsolete. The “Next Steps” section at the end of the CCI section elaborates on the work to incorporate new measures, particularly for career.

Data Sources and Amendment Windows

Table 19, below, identifies the data sources for each measure and the data amendment timeline. (Please note that the amendment window for each CCI measure has closed.)

Table 19: CCI Data Sources and Data Amendment Timeline CCI Measure Data Source Data Amendment

Windows Grade 11 Smarter

Balanced Summative

Assessments in ELA and

Mathematics

Testing vendor The testing vendor does not

have an amendment window.

CTE Pathway Completion

CALPADS field 11.14 in the Student Career Technical Education (SCTE) file

The CALPADS amendment deadline for

2018–19 closed on September 6, 2019.

These data are extracted out of the CALPADS each year by the CDE after the EOY amendment deadline

closes.



CCI Measure Data Source Data Amendment Windows

AP Exams The College Board

LEAs can use the following link to The

College Board web page to make data corrections: http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/score_reports_data/score_reports

/232605.html

IB Exams

IB

The IB does not have amendment window.

College Credit Courses (formerly

known as Dual Enrollment)

The following CALPADS fields are used for Academic College Credit Courses: Field #9.07 (CRS-State Course Code): • 2190: Dual Enrollment College

Course – English Language Arts • 2290: Dual Enrollment College

Course – Foreign Languages • 2490: Dual Enrollment College

Course – Mathematics • 2690: Dual Enrollment College

Course – Science • 2790: Dual Enrollment College

Course – History/Social Science • 2890: Dual Enrollment College

Course – Visual or Performing Arts • 6090: Dual Enrollment College

Course – Other

-AND- CALPADS Data Field #10.18 (Student Course Final Grade): A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, P (passing)

The CALPADS amendment deadline for

2018–19 closed on September 6, 2019.

The certified EOY course data are extracted by the

CDE after the amendment deadline closes.

The prior year course data are extracted from the

ODS (i.e., certified data are not used).

http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/score_reports_data/score_reports/232605.html






CCI Measure Data Source Data Amendment Windows

College Credit Courses

(Continued)

The following CALPADS fields are used for CTE College Credit Courses: CALPADS Data Field #9.07 (State Course Code) in CTE Course Codes 7000-8999 -AND- CALPADS Data Field #9.17 (Course Nonstandard Instructional Level Code):

• ‘16’ – College Credit -AND- CALPADS Data Field #10.18 (Student Course Final Grade): • A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, P

(passing)

(See notes for this measure on prior

page)

a–g Completion

This is the “Student Met All UC CSU Requirements Indicator” in CALPADS (field #1.29). When a student graduates, the LEA marks the student record (with a Yes or No) to identify whether the student completed a-g requirements.

For the 2019 Dashboard, this data

element was extracted out of the CALPADS

ODS on September 6, 2019.

State Seal of Biliteracy

This is the “Student Seal of Biliteracy Indicator” in CALPADS (field #1.33). When the student graduates, the LEA marks the student record (with a Yes or No) to identify whether the student earned a State Seal of Biliteracy.

For the 2019 Dashboard, this data

element was extracted out of the CALPADS

ODS on September 6, 2019.

Leadership/ Military Science

This is the “CRS-State Course Code” in CALPADS (field #9.07 and course code #2505). As the student completes the course, the LEA submits the course and also provides a grade for the course.

The CALPADS amendment deadline

for 2018–19 closed on September 6, 2019.

These data are extracted out of the

CALPADS each year by the CDE after the

EOY amendment deadline closes.



College/Career Indicator Model and Benchmark Criteria An SBE-approved CCI Model is used to place the college and career measures across the following three levels:

• Prepared • Approaching Prepared • Not Prepared

To calculate the CCI for a school or LEA, a student is assigned to one of the three levels, based on the highest benchmark measure/s that they meet. The CCI measures and benchmark criteria are identified in Table 20.



Table 20: College/Career Indicator Model This graphic is also posted on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ (see District Resources tab). (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)




Table 20 (Continued)



Status and Change Calculation Formulas The CCI is based on the percent of students who performed “Prepared.” Note that students who take the CAAs are included in the CCI calculations for non-DASS and DASS schools.

Calculation Formulas for Comprehensive High Schools

Status

Total number of students in the Class of 2019 who graduated in four years and met the “Prepared” criteria + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in five

years and met the “Prepared” criteria

divided by

Total number of students who entered grade nine for the first time in 2015–16 for the Class of 2019 + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in five years and met

the “Prepared” criteria

Change

Current Status minus Prior Year Status*

*The prior year Status is not the Status reported in the 2018 Dashboard. It has been re-calculated using the new Status formula noted above, which reflects the use of the combinedfour-and five-year graduation rate and the changes to the CCI noted at the beginning of theCCI section.

Calculation Formulas for DASS SchoolsStatus

Total number of DASS graduates who met the “Prepared” criteria

divided by

Total number of DASS graduates plus grade twelve non-graduates who were enrolled for at least 90 cumulative calendar days from July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019 with a primary

enrollment (code 10 status in CALPADS) or short-term enrollment (code 30 status in CALPADS)

Change


*The prior year Status is not the Status reported in the 2018 Dashboard. It has been re-calculated to incorporate the changes to the CCI noted at the beginning of the CCI section.



Calculation Formulas for LEAsStatus The data for comprehensive high schools and DASS schools’ are aggregated at the LEA level, except in the case of charter schools, which, under LCFF, are treated as their own LEAs. Therefore, their data are not included in their authorizers’ data.

• LEAs with only comprehensive high schools have a CCI based on the combined four- and five-year graduation rate only. The Status formula for these LEAs is the same as thecalculation formula for comprehensive high schools noted on the prior page.

• County offices with only DASS schools have a CCI based on the DASS graduationcohort only. The Status formula for these county offices is the same as the calculationformula for DASS schools noted on the prior page.

• LEAs with both comprehensive high schools and DASS schools have a graduationrate that incorporates both the combined rate and the DASS graduation rate as detailedbelow:

Total number of students in the Class of 2019 who graduated in four years and met the“Prepared” criteria + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in five

years and met the “Prepared” criteria + total number of 2019 DASS graduates who met the “Prepared” criteria

divided by

Total number of students who entered grade nine for the first time in 2015–16 for the Class of 2019 + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in five years and met the “Prepared” criteria + total number of students in the 2019 DASS graduation rate

Change


*The prior year Status is not the Status reported in the 2018 Dashboard. It has been re-calculated using the new Status formula noted above, which reflects the use of the combined four-and five-year graduation rate and the changes to the CCI noted at the beginning of the CCI section.

Cut Scores, Five-by-Five Colored Table, and Three-by-Five Colored Table

• See Appendix A for statewide distributions, cut scores, and the five-by-five coloredtable.

• See section titled “Small Populations: Less than 150 Students” for the three-by-fivecolored table for the CCI. Note that this table is automatically applied when there are



less than 150 students in the denominator of the CCI at the LEA, school, and student group levels.

Student Groups and Data Collection

Please view the section titled “Student Groups” to access the student group definitions and data collection for this indicator.

Additional Reports on How Student Groups Performed on Each Measure

Additional data on how LEA, schools, and student groups performed in the Prepared and Approaching Prepared levels for each CCI measure are reported in the CDE School Dashboard Additional Reports and Data web page at https://www6.cde.ca.gov/californiamodel/ (select the College/Career Measures Report).

The additional reports identifies the percent of students that met each criteria. These data are reported for the LEA, school, and student groups. See the section titled “Additional Reports: CCI, Participation Rate, Student Group, and Five-by-Five Reports” later in this guide to access more information about the CCI report.

Example on How to Calculate the College/Career Indicator: Gemstone High

(A Comprehensive High School that Serves Grades Nine through Twelve)

Step 1: Determine Graduates

Because this is a comprehensive high school, the combined four-and five year graduation rate is used to determine the graduates.

a. Take the students in the Class of 2019 four-year graduation cohort and identify thosewho received a standard diploma. Those who did not receive a standard diploma (ordid not graduate) are automatically placed in the “Not Prepared” level.

• Of the 303 students in the Class of 2019, 285 students received the standarddiploma at the end of their fourth year.

b. Take the students from the prior graduating class (Class of 2018) and identify thosewho received a standard diploma at the end of their fifth year.

• Of the six students who were fifth-year seniors from the Class of 2018, tworeceived a standard diploma at the end of their fifth year.

285 (fourth-year graduates from Class of 2019) + 2 (fifth-year graduates from Class of 2018) = 287 total graduates




Step 2: Determine What Each Graduate Accomplished During the Last Four or Five Years in High School Take all graduates determined in Step 1 and examine what courses, exams, or seals they completed or earned during the last four or five years of high school:

• For students in the Class of 2019 who graduated in four years, the following four

academic years is used: 2015–16, 2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19.

• For students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in five years, the following five academic years is used: 2014–15, 2015–16, 2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19.

Example Student 1: Minnie, a fourth-year graduate in the Class of 2019, in the last four years:

• Completed a-g course requirements • Completed one CTE Pathway • Scored Standard Met in ELA • Scored Standard Nearly Met in mathematics

Minnie meets the criteria for both the Prepared and Approaching Prepared CCI levels:

• Meets Prepared by completing both: o a-g course requirements (with C minus or better), and o One CTE pathway (with a C minus or better on the capstone course)

• Meets Approaching Prepared by scoring Standard Met in ELA and Standard

Nearly Met in mathematics.

Because the CCI places a student in a level based on his/her highest achievement, Minnie will be included in the “Prepared” CCI level.

Example Student 2: Donald, a fourth-year graduate in the Class of 2019, in the last four years:

• Earned a State Seal of Biliteracy and scored Standard Met in ELA • Completed one semester of college coursework in History with a grade of A- and

received college credits • Scored Standard Met in ELA • Scored Standard Met in mathematics

Donald meets criteria for both the Prepared and Approaching Prepared CCI levels:

• Meets Prepared in two ways:



(1) He earned a State Seal of Biliteracy and scored Standard Met in ELA(2) He scored Standard Met in both ELA and mathematics

• Meets Approaching Prepared by completing one semester of History in which hepassed the course with a grade of A- and received college credits for the course.

Because the CCI places a student in a level based on their highest achievement, Donald will be included in the “Prepared” CCI level.

Example Student 3: Maia, a fifth-year graduate in the Class of 2018, in the last five years:

• Completed three years of leadership/military science• Completed one semester of college coursework in Music with a grade of B+ and

received college credits• Scored Standard Nearly Met in ELA• Scored Standard Met in mathematics

Maia meets criteria for both the Prepared and Approaching Prepared CCI levels:

• Meets Prepared by completing the following two requirements:

• Completing at least two years of Leadership/Military Science, and• Scoring Standard Nearly Met in ELA and Standard Met in mathematics

• Meets Approaching Prepared by completing one semester of Music where shepassed the course with grade of B+ and received college credits.

Because the CCI places a student in a level based on his/her highest achievement, Maia will be included in the “Prepared” CCI level.

Example Student 4: Thom, a fifth-year graduate in the Class of 2018, in the last five years:

• Completed one CTE Pathway• Completed one semester of college coursework in astronomy with a grade of D+• Scored Standard Nearly Met in ELA• Scored Standard Nearly Met in mathematics

Thom meets criteria for the Approaching Prepared CCI level in two ways:

(1) He completed one CTE pathway(2) He scored Standard Nearly Met in both ELA and mathematics

Because the CCI places a student in a level based on his/her highest achievement, Thom will be included in the “Approaching Prepared” CCI level.




Take all graduates who were placed in the Prepared level and calculate Status.

• Of the 285 fourth-year graduates from the Class of 2019, 193 met the “Prepared” level.

• Of the 2 fifth-year graduates from the Class of 2018, one met the “Prepared” level.(Note: only fifth-year graduates determined as “Prepared” are included in thecalculation.)

193 students from Class of 2019 who met Prepared + 1 fifth-year student in the Class of 2018 who met Prepared

divided by

303 students in the Class of 2019 four-year cohort + 1 fifth-year student in the Class of 2018 who met Prepared

= 63.8% Prepared

63.8% is the Status for Gemstone High.


• Current Year Status: 63.8 percent Prepared• Prior Year Status: 62 percent Prepared• Change Calculation: Difference Between Current Year Status to Prior Year Status:

63.8% minus 62% = +1.8%

The school increased by 1.8 percent on the CCI.


Upon combining the school’s Status and Change results, 63.8 percent and 1.8 percent respectively, the school’s performance level for the CCI is “Green.” The five-by-five color table on the following page reflects how the school received a Green performance level.



Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Gemstone High

Maintained Declined Increased Increased Declined from Prior Significantly from Prior Significantly Performance from Prior Year from Prior Year (by from Prior Level Year (by 2.0% (declined or Year (by 9.1% 2.0% to Year (by 9.0% to 9.0%) increased by or more) 8.9%) or more)1.9% or less)Very High 70.0% or Yellow Green Blue Blue Blue greater in

Current Year High

55.0% to Orange Yellow Green Green Blue 69.9% in Current Year

Medium 35.0% to less Orange Orange Yellow Green Green than 54.9% in Current Year

Low 10.0% to Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow 34.9% in

Current YearVery Low

9.9% or lower Red Red Red Orange Yellowin Current Year

College/Career Indicator for DASS Schools

How Do CCI Calculations Differ for DASS Schools

Unlike the CCI calculations for comprehensive high schools, which are based on the combined four-and five-year graduation rate, CCI calculations for DASS schools are based on the DASS graduation rate.

Students who attend alternative schools are highly mobile; some may be returning to school after years of being out of the system. In addition, DASS students are often credit deficient and not on track to graduate within four years after entering grade nine. Therefore, in order to



fairly evaluate a DASS school’s impact on its students, the DASS graduation rate is used as the base of students for this indicator.

For more information, see the DASS Graduation Rate section discussed in the Graduation Rate Indicator section later in the guide.

How Many Years of Data Are Used? All courses, exams (with the exception of the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments), and/or seals that students in DASS schools completed or earned during the previous four or five years of high school will be used for the CCI. For the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments, the last three years of assessment results will be used (i.e., 2017, 2018, and 2019 results). For example:

• For a fourth-year senior who graduated during the 2018–19 school year, all accomplishments achieved by the student in the past four years (2015–16, 2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19) will be used to determine the student’s placement in one of the three CCI levels.

• For a fifth-year senior who graduated during the 2018–19 school year, all accomplishments achieved by the student in the past five years (2014–15, 2015–16, 2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19) will be used to determine the student’s placement in one of the three CCI levels.

• For a sixth-year senior who graduated during the 2018–19 school year, all accomplishments achieved by the student in the past five years (2014–15, 2015–16, 2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19) will be used to determine the student’s placement in one of the three CCI levels.

Data Source The various college and career measures identified in Tables 18, 19, and 20 are also used for DASS schools to evaluate a student’s preparedness for college or career. Calculation Formula for Status

Total Number of Students Who Graduated in 2018–19 Who Performed “Prepared” on the CCI Model

divided by

Total Number of Students in DASS Graduation Rate for 2018–19



Calculation Formula for Change

Current Year Status minus Prior Year Status


• See Appendix A for statewide distributions, cut scores, and the five-by-five coloredtable.

• See section titled “Small Populations: Less than 150 Students” for the three-by-fivecolored table for the CCI. The three-by-five is automatically applied when there areless than 150 students in the denominator of the CCI.


The student group definitions, and data collection processes and deadlines, used for non-DASS schools are also applied to DASS schools. Please view the section titled “Student Groups” to access this information.

Additional Reports on How Student Groups Performed on Each Measure

DASS schools also receive the additional data on how LEA, schools, and student groups performed in the Prepared and Approaching Prepared levels for each CCI measure. Please view the CDE School Dashboard Additional Reports and Data web page at https://www6.cde.ca.gov/californiamodel/ (select the College/Career Measures Report).

The additional reports identify the percent of students that met each CCI criteria. These data are reported for the LEA, school, and student groups. See the section titled “Additional Reports: CCI, Participation Rate, Student Group, and Five-by-Five Reports” later in this guide to access more information about the CCI report.

Example on How to Calculate the College/Career Indicator for DASS Schools: Moonstone DASS High School

(Serves Grades Nine through Twelve)

Step 1: Review DASS Graduation Rate Business Rules

Because the DASS graduation rate is used as the base of students included in the CCI for DASS schools, please review the DASS Graduation Rate section in this guide to access the business rules.

Step 2: Determine Graduates

a. Take the students in the 2018–19 DASS graduation rate (i.e., students who were




assigned to grade twelve in 2018–19 plus grade eleven students who graduated in 2018–19) and identify those who received a standard diploma, a high school equivalency certificate (e.g., GED, HiSET, TASC), an adult education high school diploma, or Special Education Certificate. These students are considered graduates and are eligible to be placed in the Prepared or Approaching Prepared levels.

Grade twelve DASS students who did not earn any of these diplomas or certificates are not graduates and therefore are automatically placed in the “Not Prepared” level.

For 2018–19:

• 54 students were in grade twelve. Of these, 30 were counted as graduates.

• One student was in grade eleven. Because this student received a standarddiploma, this student was counted as a graduate.

30 (graduates in grade twelve) + 1 (graduate in grade eleven) = 31 total graduates

Step 3: Determine What Each Graduate Accomplished During the Prior Five Years

a. Take all graduates determined in Step 2 and examine what courses, exams, or sealsthey completed or earned during high school. The last five years of data will be usedfor all students regardless of whether the student graduated in four years, five years,six years, or more.

Example Student 1: Jimmy, a grade twelve student, transferred multiple timesbetween non-DASS and DASS schools. During the last four years in high schoolbefore he graduated, Jimmy:

• Completed a CTE pathway at Constellation High School, a non-DASS school,with a grade of B in the capstone course

• Passed the CHSPE at Moonstone DASS School. He meets the 90-dayenrollment requirements at this school. (See DASS Graduation Rate section fordetails on meeting enrollment requirements.)

• Scored a Level 2 (Standard Nearly Met) on the Smarter Balanced SummativeAssessments in ELA at Pegasus High School, a non-DASS school

• Scored a Level 1 (Standard Not Met) on the Smarter Balanced SummativeAssessments in mathematics at Polaris DASS School

Jimmy’s last school of enrollment in CALPADS is Moonstone DASS School. Because he met the 90-day enrollment requirement at this school and passed the CHSPE, he is included in Moonstone’s DASS graduation rate (in both the numerator and denominator).



Therefore, Jimmy is included in the Moonstone’s CCI and is eligible for being placed in the Approaching Prepared CCI level. All accomplishments made by Jimmy during the last four years (at all schools he was enrolled in) will be used to place him in one of these two levels. After reviewing all of his accomplishments during the prior four years, Jimmy meets the criteria for the Approaching Prepared level:

• He completed one CTE pathway with a grade of B in the capstone course. Because the CCI places a student in a level based on his/her highest achievement, Jimmy will be included in the “Approaching Prepared” level at Moonstone DASS School. (Note that even though Jimmy completed the CTE pathway at Constellation High School, he is included in Moonstone’s CCI because he passed the CHSPE at that school and Jimmy’s accomplishments at all schools are taken into account.) Example Student 2: Nick, a grade twelve student, transferred multiple times between non-DASS and DASS schools. During the last five years in high school before he graduated, Nick: • Completed one semester of college coursework in Welding at the local community

college while attending Andromeda High School (non-DASS). He received a B minus in the course and was awarded college credits.

• Completed one year of leadership/military science while attending Andromeda High School (non-DASS).

• Scored a Level 2 (Standard Nearly Met) on both the ELA and mathematics Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments while enrolled at Cassiopeia DASS School.

• Completed one semester of college coursework in Refrigeration at the local

community college while attending Moonstone DASS School. He received a C plus in the course and was awarded college credits. He also passed the General Educational Development (GED) and met the 90-day enrollment requirements at this school. (See DASS Graduation Rate section for details on meeting enrollment requirements.)

Nick’s last school of enrollment in CALPADS is Moonstone DASS School. Because he met the 90-day enrollment requirement at this school and passed the GED at this school, he is included in Moonstone’s DASS graduation rate (in both the numerator and denominator), which means he is also included in Moonstone’s CCI. Therefore, Nick is included in Moonstone’s CCI and is eligible to be placed in both the Prepared and Approaching Prepared CCI levels. All accomplishments made by Nick during the last five years (at all schools he was enrolled in) will be used to place him one of the three CCI levels.



After reviewing all of his accomplishments during the prior five years, Nick meets the criteria for both the Prepared and Approaching Prepared levels:

• Meets Prepared by completing two semesters of college coursework with a grade C minus or better and receiving college credits for each course.

• Meets Approaching Prepared by scoring “Standard Nearly Met” in both the ELA and math Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments.

Because the CCI places a student in a level based on his/her highest achievement, Nick will be placed in the “Prepared” level at Moonstone DASS School. (Note that even though he completed and passed the Welding course while attending Andromeda High School, this accomplishment is credited to Moonstone DASS School. Nick’s accomplishments at all schools are taken into account.)

Example Student 3: Chen, a grade twelve student, transferred multiple times between non-DASS and DASS schools. During the last six years in high school before he graduated, Chen: • Scored a Level 1 (Standard Not Met) on both the ELA and mathematics Smarter

Balanced Summative Assessments while enrolled at Borealis Non-DASS School.

• Completed one semester of college coursework in Beginning Writing/Grammar at the local community college while attending Big Dipper DASS School. He received a C minus in the course and was awarded college credits.

• Completed one semester of college coursework in Web Development at the local

community college while attending Moonstone DASS School. He received a C plus in the course and was awarded college credits. He also passed the CHSPE and met the 90-day enrollment requirements at this school. (See DASS Graduation Rate section for details on meeting enrollment requirements.)

Chen’s last school of enrollment in CALPADS is Moonstone DASS School. Because he met the 90-day enrollment requirement at this school, and since he passed the CHSPE at this school, he is included in Moonstone’s DASS graduation rate (in both the numerator and denominator).

Therefore, Chen is included in Moonstone’s CCI and is eligible for being placed in both the Prepared and Approaching Prepared CCI levels. All accomplishments made by Chen during the last five years (at all schools he was enrolled in) will be used to place him in one of these two levels. Although Chen was in high school for six years, all of his accomplishments during the last five years will be used. Chen meets the criteria for the Prepared level:



• Meets Prepared by completing two semesters of college coursework with a grade C minus or better and receiving at least college credits for each course.

Because the CCI places a student in a level based on his/her highest achievement, Chen will be included in the “Prepared” level at Moonstone DASS School. (Note that Chen’s accomplishments at all schools are taken into account.)


a. Take all the graduates who were placed in the Prepared level (Step 2) and calculate Status. Of the 31 graduates, 25 were placed in the Prepared level. The Status is:

25 students Prepared divided by 55 total graduates= 45.5 percent Prepared


• Current Year Status: 45.5 percent Prepared • Prior Year Status: 40.5 percent Prepared • Change Calculation: Difference Between Current Year Status to Prior Year Status:

45.5 percent minus 40.5 percent = +5 percent

The school increased by 5 percent on the CCI.


Upon combining the school’s Status and Change results, 45.5 percent and 5 percent respectively, the school’s performance level for the CCI is “Green.” The five-by-five color table on the following page illustrates how the school received a Green performance level.



Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Moonstone DASS High School

Performance Level

Declined Significantly from Prior

Year (by 9.1% or more)

Declined from Prior

Year (by 2.0% to 9.0%)


Year (declined or increased by 1.9% or less)

Increased from Prior Year (by 2.0% to 8.9%)



Very High 70.0% or greater in

Current Year

Yellow Green Blue Blue Blue

High 55.0% to 69.9% in

Current Year

Orange Yellow Green Green Blue

Medium 35.0% to less than 54.9% in Current Year

Orange Orange Yellow Green Green

Low 10.0% to 34.9% in

Current Year

Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow

Very Low 9.9% or lower

in Current Year

Red Red Red Orange Yellow

Next Steps

The SBE has expressed concerns that the current CCI model does not contain sufficient career measures. In response, the CDE has been working with the CCI Work Group and California Advisory Task Force for Alternative Schools (Task Force) to explore new career measures. Based on their collective work, and with input from other stakeholders, the CDE has identified, and begun collecting data on, several new measures for possible inclusion in the CCI model. The following data were collected in CALPADS or the California Special Education Management Information System (CASEMIS) during 2018–19 school year:

• Completion of Work Force Readiness Certificate (This measure is for both DASS andnon-DASS schools.)

• Completion of Food Handler Certificate Program (This measure is limited to DASSschools only.)



• Completion of Pre-Apprenticeship – Formal and Informal Programs (These measuresare for both DASS and non-DASS schools.)

• Completion of a State or Federal Job Program (This measure is limited to DASSschools only.)

• Completion of WorkAbility I Work-Based Learning Program (This measure is limited tostudents with an Individualized Education Program [IEP].)

• Completion of Department of Rehabilitation Work-Based Learning Program (Thismeasure is limited to students with an IEP.)

In 2019–20, the CDE will continue to work with the Task Group and CCI Work Group to analyze the data, evaluate their validity and reliability as CCI measures, and develop criteria to include the measures in the CCI model.

Beginning in the 2020–21 school year, the CDE will collect data for three new potential CCI measures:

• Student Internships (This measure will be considered for both DASS and non-DASSschools.)

• Student-Led Enterprises (This measure will be considered for both DASS and non-DASS schools.)

• Virtual/Simulated Work-Based Learning (This measure will be considered for bothDASS and non-DASS schools.)

• Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) (This measure will beconsidered for both DASS and non-DASS schools.)

Communications regarding the collection of these data will be sent to accountability coordinators and CALPADS LEA coordinators, and provided in CALPADS Flashes.



Academic Performance English Learner Progress Indicator (Grades 1 – 12)


The SBE at their November 2019 meeting approved the 2019 English Learner Progress Indicator (ELPI) methodology. For the 2019 Dashboard, the CDE will only have two years of English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC) Summative Assessment (SA) results from the spring 2018 and 2019 test administrations. As a result, the CDE will report ELPI Status only in the 2019 Dashboard. The CDE will report ELPI Change in the 2020 Dashboard, when three years (2018, 2019, and 2020) of ELPAC SA results are available.

In addition, schools and LEAs testing less than 95 percent of grade K–12 EL students in the current year on the ELPAC SA will receive and 2019 ELPI Status of ‘Low’.

Who Receives this Indicator? The ELPI applies to LEAs and schools that have 30 or more ELPAC SA takers in grades 1-12 with an overall performance level in both the current and prior year.

Because the vast majority of schools have no significant, or only one significant race/ethnic student group within the EL group, student group data are not reported for the ELPI. For example, student groups such as Asian ELs, Hispanic ELs, White ELs, etc., will not be reported within the ELPI. As a result, the EL student group is the only group represented in the ELPI.

Data Sources

The ELPI uses ELPAC SA results to determine ELs progress towards English language proficiency. The ELPAC SA results are obtained from the testing vendor. Currently, all students in K–12 who indicate they speak another language on the home language survey are required to be tested on the ELPAC Initial Assessment within 30 calendar days of enrollment. If the student is determined to be an EL, the student must take the ELPAC SA annually until they are reclassified. The ELPAC measures English proficiency in four domains: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The weighted domain results are combined to create an overall performance level for each grade level. The ELPAC SA overall performance level results are used for accountability purposes.

ELPAC SA takers in grades one through twelve who have current year and prior year overall performance levels are included in the ELPI Status calculation. Each year, the CDE receives the ELPAC SA file from the testing vendor which contains a student’s current year ELPAC SA overall performance level. In order to determine EL progress toward



proficiency for ELPI Status calculations, the CDE matches student current year ELPAC SA results by statewide student identifier to prior year ELPAC SA results to acquire each students’ prior year overall performance level.

Table 21 identifies the years of ELPAC SA data that will be used to calculate EL progress toward proficiency in ELPI Status for the 2019 Dashboard.

Table 21: ELPAC SA Data Years Used in ELPI Status

Prior Year

Current Year

2017–18 ELPAC SA 2018–19 ELPAC SA

While ELPAC SA results includes kindergarten students who took the ELPAC SA in a transitional kindergarten (TK) program in the prior year, these students are not included in the ELPI Status calculation. TK is the first year of a two year kindergarten program and students in TK would need a full two years to make progress on the kindergarten standards. As a result, progress on the ELPAC SA between TK and kindergarten is not measured. However, progress on the ELPAC SA between kindergarten and grade 1 is captured in the ELPI Status calculation.

ELPI Levels for Accountability Purposes The ELPAC SA has four overall performance levels:

• Level 1 – Minimally Developed• Level 2 – Somewhat Developed• Level 3 – Moderately Developed• Level 4 – Well Developed

The ELPAC SA overall performance levels are split further into ELPI levels for accountability purposes to ensure that the ELPI reflects the average five to seven year growth trajectory of ELs toward proficiency. In California, the standardized English language proficiency (ELP) criterion for reclassification is an overall performance Level 4 on the ELPAC SA.

Dividing overall performance levels two and three (for accountability purposes only) gives six overall ELPI levels:

1) Level 1 (same as ELPAC SA Level 1)2) Level 2L (ELPAC SA Low Level 2)3) Level 2H (ELPAC SA High Level 2)4) Level 3L (ELPAC SA Low Level 3)5) Level 3H (ELPAC SA High Level 3)6) Level 4 (same as ELPAC SA Level 4)

To split ELPAC SA levels 2 and 3, the range of possible ELPAC SA scale scores were divided in half within level 2 and level 3 for each grade. When the range was not evenly



divisible, the “High Level” was given the greater range. For example:

• Grade 2: The range of possible scale scores for grade 2 in Level 2 is 1424 to 1470 (47 point range). Dividing this range into two results in the following: o ELPI Level 2L: 1424 to 1446 (23 pts) o ELPI Level 2H: 1447-1470 (24 pts)

Table 22 identifies where the Level 2 and 3 splits occur by reflecting the scale score (SS) ranges for ELPI Levels 2L, 2H, 3L, and 3H for each grade level.

Table 22

Grade 2L SS Range 2H SS Range 3L SS Range 3H SS Range

K 1374-1397 (24 pts) 1398-1421 (24 pts) 1422-1447 (26 pts) 1448-1473 (26 pts)

1 1411-1432 (22 pts) 1433-1454 (22 pts) 1455-1480 (26 pts) 1481-1506 (26 pts)

2 1424-1446 (23 pts) 1447-1470 (24 pts) 1471-1500 (30 pts) 1501-1531 (31 pts)

3 1448-1467 (20 pts) 1468-1487 (20 pts) 1488-1510 (23 pts) 1511-1534 (24 pts)

4 1459-1478 (20 pts) 1479-1498 (20 pts) 1499-1523 (25 pts) 1524-1548 (25 pts)

5 1467-1489 (23 pts) 1490-1513 (24 pts) 1514-1536 (23 pts) 1537-1559 (23 pts)

6 1475-1495 (21 pts) 1496-1516 (21 pts) 1517-1541 (25 pts) 1542-1566 (25 pts)

7 1481-1503 (23 pts) 1504-1526 (23 pts) 1527-1550 (24 pts) 1551-1575 (25 pts)

8 1486-1509 (24 pts) 1510-1533 (24 pts) 1534-1561 (28 pts) 1562-1589 (28 pts)

9-10 1493-1518 (26 pts) 1519-1544 (26 pts) 1545-1574 (30 pts) 1575-1605 (31 pts)

11-12

1500-1526 (27 pts) 1527-1554 (28 pts) 1555-1584 (30 pts) 1585-1614 (30 pts)

Demonstrating Progress for Accountability Purposes ELs who advance at least one overall ELPI level from the prior year to current year (e.g., 2L to 2H; 3L to 3H) will be included in the numerator of the ELPI Status calculation. ELs who meet the ELP criterion (Level 4) in the prior and current year will also be included in the numerator of the ELPI Status calculation (i.e., counted as making progress). Table 23 provides examples of when an LEA or school receives credit based on an EL student’s ELPI level performance from the current year to prior year.



Table 23

Prior Overall ELPI Level Current Overall ELPI Level

Does the LEA or School Receive

Credit?

Level 1 Level 1 No

Level 1 Level 2L Yes

Level 2L Level 2L No

Level 2L Level 2H Yes

Level 2H Level 2H No

Level 2H Level 3L Yes

Level 3L Level 3L No

Level 3L Level 3H Yes

Level 3H Level 3H No

Level 3H Level 4 Yes

Level 4 Level 4 Yes

Rigorous Goal: Because the ELPI has six levels, California has a rigorous goal to have students obtain ELP in five years. For example, if a student enters school at Level 1, the expectation is for the student to reach proficiency in five years. If a student enters school at Level 3, the student must reach proficiency in two years.

Calculation Formula for ELPI Status

ELPAC SA Takers Who Increased at least 1 ELPI Level Between the Current and Prior Year

plus

ELPAC SA Takers Who Maintained the ELP criterion (Level 4) Between the Current and Prior Year

divided by

Total Number of ELPAC SA Takers with Both a Current and Prior Year ELPAC SA Level



ELPI Status Rate Calculation Example

Jade Elementary had a 53% ELPI Status Rate on the 2019 Dashboard.

Table 24 shows the number of EL students performing at each ELPI level between 2018 and 2019.

Table 24 Levels 2018 ELPI

Level 1 2018 ELPI Level 2L

2018 ELPI Level 2H

2018 ELPI Level 3L

2018 ELPI Level 3H

2018 ELPI Level 4

2019 ELPI Level 1 20 (yellow) 1 (yellow) 0 (yellow) 0 (yellow) 0 (yellow) 0 (yellow)

2019 ELPI Level 2L 20 (green) 28 (yellow) 1 (yellow) 0 (yellow) 1 (yellow) 0 (yellow)

2019 ELPI Level 2H 3 (green) 11 (green) 30 (yellow) 0 (yellow) 0 (yellow) 0 (yellow)

2019 ELPI Level 3L 3 (green) 4 (green) 15 (green) 38 (yellow) 2 (yellow) 0 (yellow)

2019 ELPI Level 3H 2 (green) 3 (green) 1 (green) 9 (green) 20 (yellow) 0 (yellow)

2019 ELPI Level 4 2 (green) 0 (green) 0 (green) 2 (green) 10 (green) 74 (blue)

• A total of 300 EL students took both the 2017–18 and 2018–19 ELPAC SA (all cellsincluding blue, green and yellow in Table 4). This is the denominator of the ELPI Statuscalculation.

85 of these EL students increased at least one ELPI level (green cells in Table 4).This number is included in the numerator and denominator of the ELPI Statuscalculation.

74 of these EL students maintained the ELP criterion of Level 4 (blue cell in Table4). This number is also included in the numerator and denominator of the ELPIStatus calculation.

141 of these EL students maintained ELPI Levels 1, 2L, 2H, 3L, or 3H or declinedat least one ELPI level (yellow cells in Table 4). This number is included in thedenominator only of the ELPI Status calculation.

85 + 74 = 159 = 53% 300 300

Status Cut Scores

See Appendix A for the statewide distributions used to set the preliminary Status cut scores. The final Status cut scores were approved by the SBE in November 2019.



Automatic Assignment of ‘Low’ ELPI Status Level

LEAs and schools with 30 or more EL students enrolled must meet the participation rate criteria.

Calculation Formula for ELPI Participation Rate

2018–19 ELPAC SA Takers in Grades K–12

divided by

EL Students Enrolled in Grades K–12

Whole number rounding is used for the participation rate. Therefore, an LEA or school that has a calculated participation rate of 94.1 percent or above will be rounded to 95 percent.

LEAs and schools with an ELPI Status other than ‘Very Low’ that failed to meet the participation rate criteria by not testing at least 95 percent of their K–12 EL population on the 2018 –19 ELPAC SA are automatically assigned an ELPI Status of ‘Low’.

The number of students tested includes all ELPAC SA takers in grades K–12. The number of K–12 EL students enrolled is derived from CALPADS. It is determined using the final entity of EL student enrollment during the ELPAC SA testing window of February 1 through May 31.



Academic PerformanceLocal Indicator: Implementation of Academic Standards

(Priority 2)

Self-Assessment Tool for Priority 2

LEAs may provide a narrative summary of its progress in the implementation of state academic standards based on locally selected measures or tools (Option 1). Alternatively, LEAs may complete the optional reflection tool (Option 2).

OPTION 1: Narrative Summary

In the narrative box provided on the Dashboard, identify the locally selected measures or tools that the LEA is using to track its progress in implementing the state academic standards adopted by the state board and briefly describe why the LEA chose the selected measures or tools.

Additionally, summarize the LEA’s progress in implementing the academic standards adopted by the SBE, based on the locally selected measures or tools. The adopted academic standards are:

• English Language Arts (ELA)–Common Core State Standards for ELA• 2012 English Language Development (ELD) Standards (Aligned to Common Core

State Standards for ELA)• Mathematics–Common Core State Standards for Mathematics• Next Generation Science Standards• History–Social Science• Career Technical Education• Health Education Content Standards• Physical Education Model Content Standards• Visual and Performing Arts• World LanguagePlease provide response here:

OPTION 2: Reflection Tool

Recently Adopted Academic Standards and/or Curriculum Frameworks

1. Rate the LEA’s progress in providing professional learning for teaching to therecently adopted academic standards and/or curriculum frameworks identifiedbelow.



Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – Beginning Development; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – Full Implementation and Sustainability

Academic Standards 1 2 3 4 5 ELA – Common Core State Standards for ELA ELD (Aligned to ELA Standards) Mathematics – Common Core State Standards for Mathematics Next Generation Science Standards History-Social Science

2. Rate the LEA’s progress in making instructional materials that are aligned to therecently adopted academic standards and/or curriculum frameworks identifiedbelow available in all classrooms where the subject is taught.Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – BeginningDevelopment; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – Full Implementationand Sustainability


3. Rate the LEA’s progress in implementing policies or programs to support staff inidentifying areas where they can improve in delivering instruction aligned to therecently adopted academic standards and/or curriculum frameworks identifiedbelow (e.g., collaborative time, focused classroom walkthroughs, teacher pairing).

Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – BeginningDevelopment; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – Full Implementationand Sustainability




Other Adopted Academic Standards

4. Rate the LEA’s progress implementing each of the following academic standardsadopted by the state board for all students.Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – Beginning Development; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – Full Implementation and Sustainability

Academic Standards 1 2 3 4 5 Career Technical Education Health Education Content Standards Physical Education Model Content Standards Visual and Performing Arts World Language

Support for Teachers and Administrators

5. During the 2015-16 school year (including summer 2015), rate the LEA’s successat engaging in the following activities with teachers and school administrators?Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – BeginningDevelopment; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – FullImplementation and Sustainability

Support for Teachers and Administrators 1 2 3 4 5 Identifying the professional learning needs of groups of teachers or staff as a whole Identifying the professional learning needs of individual teachers Providing support for teachers on the standards they have not yet mastered

Note: Minor technical changes to the verbiage for this prompt will be proposed at the November 2018 California State Board of Education meeting.

Optional Narrative

6. Provide any additional information in the text box provided in the Dashboard thatthe LEA believes is relevant to understanding its progress implementing theacademic standards adopted by the state board.



Academic EngagementChronic Absenteeism Rate Indicator (Grades K–8)

Who Receives this Indicator?

All LEAs and schools with students in grades kindergarten through grade eight and that have 30 or more students who are eligible enrolled in both the current and prior years will receive a performance level (color) for this indicator. (Note that chronic absenteeism data for all grade levels, including high schools, are reported on DataQuest.)

Data Source

The attendance data used for this indicator stems from data LEAs and schools submit in the Student Absence Summary (STAS) file in CALPADS. LEAs and schools certify these data as part of the End-of-Year (EOY) 3 certification process. The CDE extracts these certified data from CALPADS to calculate this indicator.

Differences between DataQuest and Dashboard

1. Different Grade Spans Reported: While the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator for theDashboard is an indicator for K–8 schools, the chronic absenteeism rates arereported in DataQuest for all grade spans (i.e., K–12).

2. Charter Schools Are Not Included in LEA Dashboard Reports. As with all stateindicators reported on the Dashboard, charter school data are not included in theirauthorizing agency’s Dashboard report. (See section titled “Who Gets a PerformanceLevel (Color)?” earlier in the guide.)

Chronic Absenteeism Definition (Numerator)

Definition: A student is considered a chronic absentee if he or she is absent at least 10 percent of the instructional days in which he/she was enrolled at the school. The same weight is assigned to all students who meet this criterion. Students who meet this definition are included in the numerator of the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator.

• Example: 20 of 2,000 students at Nebula Middle School were absent at least 10percent of the instructional days. The chronic absenteeism rate for the school is 1percent:

20 divided by 2,000 = 1 percent

What are considered absences in the chronic absenteeism calculation?

• Excused absences• Unexcused absences• Out-of-school suspension



Is there a minimum amount of time that a student has to be in school to be considered not absent? A day attendance is defined as any day a student attended for all or part of a school day. Does attendance from one district transfer to the new district? For instance, would a student who was chronically absent at the previous district be considered chronically absent at the new district? No. The student would count as chronically absent only at the first district. As with all state indicators, the data used for the Dashboard are based on the data generated at each district or school. An LEA or school does not inherit another LEA/school’s data.

Eligible Enrollment (Denominator)

Which students are considered not eligible to be chronically absent and therefore excluded from the denominator of the rate? Students who meet one or more of the criteria below are excluded from the chronic absenteeism calculations:

• Enrolled less than 31 instructional days, • Enrolled at least 31 instructional days but did not attend at least one day, or • Flagged as exempt in the district attendance submission:

o Enrolled in a Non-Public School (NPS), o Received instruction through a home or hospital instructional setting, or o Attended community college full-time.

Therefore, students who were enrolled for at least 31 instructional days and attended at least one day are included in the denominator of the chronic absenteeism calculation. This indicator includes students in kindergarten. Does this mean it includes students in transitional kindergarten (TK) too? Yes. Transitional kindergartners and kindergartners are both coded the same way in CALPADS. Therefore, TK students are counted as kindergartners for the Dashboard. While the school may not be compulsory for students enrolled in TK or kindergarten, research shows that reducing absenteeism in the lower grades is critically important as it impacts achievement in later years. Are students who receive home/hospital instruction included in the calculations for chronic absenteeism? LEAs are advised by CALPADS to report attendance summary data for the days a student was not enrolled in home/hospital. They are also advised to exempt students who are on a majority of home/hospital instruction (i.e., a record has to be submitted in CALPADS specifically exempting these students).



• Example: If a student was: o Enrolled at a school for 3 months o In a home/hospital for 3 months o Returned to school for the remainder of the school year This student would be included in the denominator of the chronic absenteeism Indicator only for the days enrolled at the school (i.e., not included during the days in home/hospital).

Are students in idependent study included the calculations for chronic absenteeism? Yes. As long as the student meet the eligible enrollment rule (enrolled for at least 31 instructional days and attended at least one day), the student is included in the chronic absenteeism calculation. Key Difference: Reverse Goal For most of the state indicators, the desired outcome is a high percent in both Status and Change. However, for the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator, the desired outcome is a low chronic absenteeism rate, which means a low percent for Status and Change. (This is similar to the desired outcome for the Suspension Rate Indicator.)

Automatic Assignment of an Orange Performance Level

LEAs and schools are automatically assigned an Orange performance level for the Chronic Absenteeism Rate Indicator if they:

1. Submitted but did not certify their absenteeism data in CALPADS for the current or prior Dashboard cycles, or

2. Had more full-days of out-of-school suspensions than the number of days

reported as absences. Recall that out-of-school suspensions are counted as absences. LEAs and schools meet this criterion if (for the current Dashboard cycle) the CALPADS student absence summary file reflected:

a. Zero percent chronic absences, and

b. More full-day out-of-school suspensions (e.g., 15 full suspension days) reported

than the number of reported absences.

LEAs and schools that meet any of the rules above cannot receive a performance level higher than an Orange. However, if any submitted absence data places an LEA or school with a Red performance level, the LEA or school will continue to receive a Red performance level and not be assigned an Orange. The downloadable data files identify which LEAs or schools were assigned an Orange



performance color. These data files can be accessed on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ - see Data Files and Guide tab. The “certifyflag” field identifies LEAs and schools that receive an Orange performance level under the first criterion (i.e., submitted but did not certify). The “dataerrorflag” field identifies LEAs and schools that receive an Orange performance level under the second criterion (i.e., had more full-days of out-of-school suspensions than the number of days reported as absences).

Calculation Formula for Status

Number of Students Absent 10 Percent or More of Instructional Days During the 2018–19 Academic Year

divided by

Number of Students who are Eligible Enrolled during the 2018–19 Academic Year


Status (2018–19 chronic absenteeism rate) minus 2017–18 chronic absenteeism rate


• See Appendix A for statewide distributions, cut scores, and the five-by-five colored table.

• See section titled “Small Populations: Less than 150 Students” for the three-by-five colored table for the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator. Note that this table is automatically applied when there are less than 150 students who meet the chronic absenteeism eligibility enrollment requirements at the LEA, school, and student group levels.


Please view the section titled “Student Groups” to access the student group definitions and data collection processes and deadlines for this indicator.




Example: Aquamarine Academy (Serves Grades Kindergarten through Eight)

Step 1: Determine Status

First, determine the number of students who were absent for at least 10 percent of the instructional days. Out of the school’s 250 enrolled students:

• Twenty-nine were included in the numerator of the chronic absenteeism rate because they were enrolled for 31 or more instructional days and attended for at least one or more of these days. In addition, these students were absent for at least 10 percent of the instructional days.

• Ten other students who had absence data were excluded from the numerator

because:

o Three were enrolled for less than 31 instructional days, o Two received home/hospital instruction for the majority of the year and were

recorded in CALPADS as exempt, and o One attended community college full-time

The school’s calculated 2018–19 chronic absenteeism rate and the school’s Status is:

29 (eligible enrolled) divided by 250 (total enrolled) = 11.6%.

Step 2: Determine Change

Change is the difference between the current year chronic absenteeism rate and the prior year’s chronic absenteeism rate.

Because the school’s prior year (2017–18) chronic absenteeism rate was 6.2%, the

Change is:

11.6% minus 6.2% = 5.4%.

Step 3: Determine the Performance Level (Color)

The school’s performance level (color) for the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator will be based on a combination of its Status (11.6%) and Change (5.4%) data. This means that the chronic absenteeism rate worsened in 2019, with more students missing 10 percent or more of instructional days. Based on the school’s Status and Change results, the school’s performance level is “Red.” The five-by-five colored table on the following page illustrates how the performance level was derived.



Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Aquamarine Academy

Performance Level

Increased Significantly from Prior Year (by greater

than 3.0%)



(declined or increased by

less than 0.5%)

Declined from Prior

Year (by 0.5% to less than

3.0%)


Year (by 3.0% or

more)

Very Low 2.5% or less in Current

Year


Low More than 2.5% to 5.0% in

Current Year


Medium More than 5.0% to 10.0% in

Current Year


High More than 10.0% to 20.0% in

Current Year


Very High More than 20.0% in

Current Year




Academic Engagement Graduation Rate Indicator (Grades 9–12) Changes for this Indicator

• Approval of a Combined Four-and Five-Year Graduation Rate (Combined Graduation Rate): In July 2019, the SBE approved the implementation of a combined graduation rate, which reflects all students who: (1) graduate in four years as part of the most current graduating class and (2) graduate in five years as part of the prior year graduating class. Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, the Graduation Rate Indicator for all comprehensive high schools1(non-DASS schools only) will be based on the combined rate.

To ensure that valid comparisons are made when calculating Change, the prior year graduation data was re-calculated using the combined rate.

• Approval of Revised Status Cut Scores: Because the addition of fifth-year graduates increase graduation rates, in September 2019, the SBE approved that the Very Low Status level threshold be raised from “below 67 percent” to “below 68 percent.” Adjusting the threshold for Very Low impacts the threshold for the adjacent Status level, Low.

Although ESSA allows states to use an extended graduation rate for accountability, the long-term goal for the extended rate must be higher than the long-term goal for the four-year cohort graduation rate. Therefore, at the November 2019 SBE meeting, the SBE approved a long-term goal of 90.5 percent for the extended rate (0.5 above the 90 percent goal that was approved via the ESSA State Plan for the four-year cohort rate). With this approval, the High and Medium Status cut scores for comprehensive high schools, and High and Very High Status cut scores for DASS, were revised. Note that revisions were not made to the Change cut scores.


• Traditional Comprehensive High Schools and LEAs with Only Comprehensive High Schools Will Receive a Performance Color for this Indicator as long as these entities have 30 or more students in the denominator of the combined four-and five-year graduation rate in the current and prior year.

1 Comprehensive high schools: for the purposes of the Dashboard, comprehensive high schools are defined as secondary schools that serve students through grade twelve. Therefore, they include, for example, schools that serve grades 9–12, 7–12, 6–12, and K–12. Comprehensive high schools are non-DASS, which includes non-DASS charter schools.



• Non-DASS Charter Schools Will Receive a Performance Color for this Indicator aslong as there are a total of 30 or more students in the denominator of the combinedgraduation rate in the current and prior year.

• DASS Schools (both charter and non-charter) and COEs that Serve Only DASSSchools Will Receive a Performance Color for this Indicator as long as there are 30or more students in the denominator of the DASS graduation rate in both the current andprior year.

• Districts and LEAs with Both Traditional Comprehensive High Schools and DASSSchools Will Receive a Performance Color for this Indicator as long as there are 30or more students in the denominator in the current and prior year. (Note that thedenominator of the graduation rate is based on the total sum of students in thecombined graduation rate and the DASS graduation rate.)

Data Source

Graduation data are reported in the CALPADS by LEAs and schools. Both the combined four- and five-year graduation rate (calculated for comprehensive high schools) as well as the DASS graduation data (calculated for DASS schools) are extracted from the CALPADS ODS.


Differences at the School-Level

1. Four-Year Cohort (DataQuest) versus Combined Rate (Dashboard). In DataQuest,the four-year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate (ACGR) is reported for allcomprehensive high schools, DASS schools, charter schools, and non-charterschools. When students first enroll in grade nine, they become part of the denominatorof this four-year graduation rate. The ACGR is the number of students who graduatefrom high school in four years with a regular high school diploma, divided by thenumber of students who form the adjusted cohort for the graduating class. (There is nocomparable “combined” or “blended” graduation rate report on DataQuest.)

In contrast, the Dashboard reports a combined four- and five-year graduation rate,which applies to comprehensive charter and non-charter high schools only. (Aseparate graduation rate for DASS schools has been developed and is detailed on thenext page, in the section numbered 2.)

The combined graduation rate includes only those students who graduate in four orfive-years with a traditional high school diploma:

• Fourth-year graduates from the most current graduation class (e.g., students inthe Class of 2019), and

• Fifth-year graduates from the prior graduation class (e.g., students in Class of2018 who graduated as fifth-year seniors at the end of 2019).



2. One-Year Graduation Count (DataQuest) versus DASS Graduation Rate (Dashboard). The one-year graduation report in DataQuest has traditionally been a count of all students at all schools that graduate by receiving a regular high school diploma within the selected academic year regardless of grade or cohort. It is not a rate as there is not a definition of who is eligible and/or supposed to graduate in the given year. This report is being updated to align with End of Year (EOY) Snapshot logic. The one-year graduation counts are required for federal reporting. While there is no corresponding one-year graduation count reported for the Dashboard, a DASS graduation rate is reported in the Dashboard. The DASS graduation rate is specifically calculated for DASS charter and DASS non-charter schools. It contains all twelfth grade students who are eligible to graduate in a selected academic year, and it also contains eleventh grade graduates. Students are considered graduates in the DASS graduation rate if they receive a traditional high school diploma; pass the CHSPE; pass the General Educational Development (GED), High School Equivalency Test (HiSET), or Test Assessing Secondary Completion (TASC); receive an adult education diploma from a DASS school; or earn a special education certificate of completion (as long as the student was eligible to take the CAA). The DASS graduation rate is often referred to as the one-year graduation rate since the denominator is based on the number of students in the DASS school who are placed in grade twelve. However, the DASS graduation rate should not be confused with the one-year graduation count found in DataQuest.

3. Five-Year Graduation Rate. In DataQuest, the five-year graduation rate is a comprehensive calculation of students graduating within five years of starting grade nine.

• The numerator is the number of students from the previous year’s four-year

cohort who graduate, with a regular high school diploma, within five years. It also includes students who transfer from another entity and graduate in their fifth year.

• The denominator is the number of students who form the previous year’s four-year graduation cohort (and will also include any fifth-year graduates who transfer in from another entity.) It is possible for a student to be in two cohorts. A student who, in the fifth year, transfers from the final four-year cohort school will be added to the cohort of the receiving school or district ONLY if the student graduates in year five; however, the student will remain in the cohort of the sending school regardless of the outcome in year five.

In the Dashboard, the five-year rate applies only to comprehensive charter and non-charter high schools and is reported for informational purposes only. This information will be reported in the Dashboard’s Detailed Report in spring 2020. For the school level rate, the numerator is the number of students from the previous



year four-year cohort who graduate from high school within five years with a regular high school diploma, as well as any cohort student transferring from another entity during the selected year that ultimately graduates in year five. The denominator is the number of students who form the previous year four-year adjusted cohort for the graduating class, as well as any cohort student transferring from another entity in year five that subsequently graduate. It is possible for a student to be in two cohorts. Students who transfers from their final four-year cohort school or district to another school or district in year five, will be added to the cohort of the receiving school or district ONLY if they graduate in year five, and will remain in the cohort of the sending school regardless of outcome in year five.

Differences at the LEA-Level

1. Four-Year Cohort AGCR (DataQuest) versus Combined Rate (Dashboard). In

DataQuest, the rules used to calculate the four-year graduation report for schools are applied at the LEA-level. The number of students in the LEA who graduate in four years with a regular high school diploma is divided by the number of students who form the adjusted cohort for the graduating class. The report includes students from all schools within the LEA: comprehensive, DASS, charter, and non-charter.

In contrast, the LEA graduation rate that is reported in the Dashboard is a blended rate. It includes students in the: (1) combined four- and five-year graduation rate, and (2) the DASS graduation rate. Note that students can only be included in one of these rates.

Combined Four- and Five-Year Graduation Rate for

Comprehensive High Schools

Because the four-year graduation rate does not capture the progress of students who take five years to graduate from high school, the SBE expressed an interest in using the five-year cohort graduation rate in the Graduation Rate Indicator. This provides an opportunity for schools to demonstrate success with students who may need additional time to earn a regular high school diploma (e.g., students with disabilities and English learners). At its July 2019 meeting, the SBE approved a combined four-and five-year graduation rate that would provide additional credit to those LEAs and schools that graduate students in their fifth year. The combined rate is applied to comprehensive high schools only. The calculation method below and the example on the following page details the logic: Calculation Method

The premise of the combined graduation rate is to use the four-year cohort graduation rate as the base, but provide additional credit for any graduates from the previous year’s cohort (i.e., students who graduated in their fifth year).



Example of Combined Four-and Five-Year Graduation Rate

Emerald High School has 100 students in the Class of 2019 (the four-year graduation cohort). Of these 100 students, 95 graduated within four years (i.e., by spring 2019).

Also in 2019, five students from the previous year’s four-year graduation cohort (Class of 2018) graduated at the end of the school year. These five students are therefore counted in the combined four-and five-year graduation rate.

Numerator: Total number of graduates:

95 graduates (Class of 2019) + 5 graduates (Class of 2018) = 100

Denominator: Sum of the 2019 four-year graduation cohort and the additional five-year graduates from the previous year’s cohort:

100 (Class of 2019 cohort) + 5 (Class of 2018 fifth year graduates) = 105

Combined rate is:

100 divided by 105 = 95.2 percent

Who Counts as a Graduate (Numerator) in the Combined Rate?

Students are included in the numerator if they earn a high school diploma by the end of their fourth or fifth year of high school.

The following exit categories and completion codes in CALPADS are used to identify graduates:

The following students are NOT considered graduates and are EXCLUDED from the numerator:

• Special Education Certificate of Completion: Students who earn this certificate areexcluded from the numerator but included in denominator.

• High School Equivalency Certificate: Students who earn a GED, HiSET, or TASCare excluded from the numerator but included in denominator.

• Adult Education High School Diploma: Students who receive an adult educationdiploma are not counted as traditional high school graduates as they do not meet thefederal definition of receiving a “regular high school diploma.”

CALPADS Exit/Completion Code Description

E230/100 Graduated, standard high school diploma



• California High School Proficiency Exam: The CHSPE does not meet the federal definition of a regular high school diploma. Therefore, students who earn the CHSPE are not counted as traditional high school graduates. These students are excluded from the numerator but included in the denominator.

Education Code allows for specific students to graduate under reduced credits (e.g., Assembly Bill 167, 216, 1806, 2121). Are these students counted in the numerator of the graduation rate if they received a diploma? Yes. Whether a student meets graduation requirements is a function at the LEA-level. Therefore, as long as the student received a standard diploma, the student will be counted as a graduate.

Who Counts in the Denominator?

Two sets of students are included in the denominator of the combined graduation rate:

1. Students in the current four-year graduation cohort. A student becomes a part of a graduation cohort, or high school graduating class, when she/he first enrolls in grade nine. Students are placed in a cohort regardless of which school they enroll in. Once a student enters grade nine, he or she will remain in that cohort and be expected to graduate within four years. For the 2019 Dashboard, the four-year graduation cohort is the Class of 2019. These are students who enrolled in grade nine in 2015–16 and met the inclusion rules (see these rules below). Denominator Inclusion Rules: The following students are included in the denominator of the combined graduation rate:

• Dropped out during the last four-year period.

• Transferred into a school during the last four-year period.

• Lost transfers (i.e., students who exited out of a school as a transfer, but never enrolled in another school by Fall Census Day, are considered lost transfers).

• Early graduates (i.e., students who graduate high school in less than four

years) are counted in the original cohort in which they began. For example, a student who entered grade nine for the first time in 2015–16 belongs to the Class of 2019. If the student graduated in 2017–18 (after three years in high school), the student would still be included in both the numerator and denominator for the Class of 2019 graduation rate (not for the Class of 2018) even though the student received his or her diploma a year early.

• Transferred to an Adult Education Program or Community College. Students who transfer to an adult education program or community college



during their four or five-years of high school without earning a regular high school diploma are included in the cohort (denominator) and counted as dropouts (excluded from the numerator).

Denominator Exclusion Rules: Students are excluded from the combined rate if, during the four-year period, they have any of the following student exit category codes in CALPADS:

CALPADS

Exit Category Code Description E130 Died T180 Transfer to Private School T200 Transfer to a High School Out of California T240 Transfer/Emigrated out of the U.S. T310 Transfer to a health facility

T370 Transfer to an Institution with a High School Diploma Program

T460 Transfer to home school program

2. Students who graduated in five years from the prior graduating class. For the 2019 Dashboard, students who enrolled in grade nine in 2014–15 (as part of the Class of 2018) and earned a high school diploma by the end of their fifth year in 2019, are also included in the denominator.

August 15 Cut Off Date

For a student to be counted as a fourth-year graduate, the student must graduate by August 15. Fifth-year graduates must also graduate by August 15 to be counted as graduates in that year. See examples below:

• Sonya, a fourth-year student belonging to the Class of 2019 at Black Diamond High School earned her standard diploma on August 16, 2019 after finishing summer school. Because Sonya did not earn her diploma and graduate by August 15, 2019, she will not be counted as a four-year graduate for the Class of 2019. Rather, she will be counted as a fifth-year graduate in Black Diamond High School’s combined rate for 2020. Therefore, Sonya will be counted as a non-graduate in the 2019 Dashboard and as a fifth year graduate in the 2020 Dashboard.

• Richard, a fifth-year high school student at Crystal High School earned his standard diploma on August 15, 2019. Because he graduated by August 15, he will be included in both the numerator and denominator of Crystal High School’s combined rate for the 2019 Dashboard. (If Richard earned his diploma after August 15, he would not be included in the combined rate.)



Is the combined rate calculated for DASS schools?

No. The combined rate is calculated for comprehensive high schools only. The DASS graduation rate is based on all students in grade twelve. These may include students who graduate in four years, five years, six years, or more. Therefore, the DASS graduation rate already takes into consideration and give credit to schools and LEAs for graduating students beyond four years.

When Students Transfer, Who is Held Accountable? All first-time grade nine students are included in a cohort. Once a student enters a cohort, they remain in that cohort. If the student moves to a different school or LEA, they are removed from the first school’s/LEA’s cohort and included in the second school’s/LEA’s cohort. The last school where the student is enrolled is held accountable for the student’s graduation outcome.

Example of When a Student Transfers

In fall 2015, Maude enrolled in Garnet School as a grade nine student. Because she was a first-time grade nine student, Maude was expected to graduate in June 2019 and was

therefore included in the 2018–19 (Class of 2019) graduation cohort.

In summer 2018, Maude’s family moved to a different neighborhood. That fall, Maude enrolled in Onyx School as a grade twelve student. She graduated with a diploma from

Onyx School at the end of the school year in 2019.

Because Maude moved, she is removed from the 2018–19 graduation cohort (denominator) for Garnet School and added to the 2018–19 graduation cohort for Onyx

School. She is also added in the numerator because she graduated with a regular diploma.

Modified Method: DASS Graduation Rate

What Are Modified Methods and Why Are They Only Applicable to DASS Schools?

Students who attend DASS schools are highly mobile; some may be returning to school after years of being out of the school system. In addition, DASS students are often credit deficient and not on track to graduate within four years. Therefore, in order to more fairly evaluate the school’s impact on its students, modified graduation criteria have been adopted for DASS schools.

Who Counts as a Graduate (Numerator) in the DASS Graduation Rate?

To be counted as a graduate for the DASS graduation rate, three criteria apply:



1. Grade Requirement—Students must:

• Be in grade eleven or twelve with a primary enrollment (enrollment status code 10 in CALPADS) or short-term enrollment (enrollment status code 30 in CALPADS)

2. Diploma/Certificate Requirement—Students must:

• Receive a standard diploma,• Pass the CHSPE,• Pass the high school equivalency test (i.e., GED, HiSET, or TASC),• Receive an adult education high school diploma issued by a DASS school, or• Earn a special education certificate of completion*

*Special Education Certificate of Completion:

o Students who earn the Certificate of Completion must be eligible to take the CAA. If they are eligible (i.e., there is a record for the student in the CAASPP file from the testing vendor), they are included in both the numerator and denominator of the DASS Graduation Rate.

In instances where a student is 18 years or older, the student is counted as a graduate as long as the student completes a special education certificate of completion. The student does not need to be eligible for the CAA. A student’s age is determined using the student’s birthdate reported in CALPADS. For the 2019 Dashboard, a student who turned 18 years or older by September 1, 2018 was considered a graduate.

3. Enrollment Days Requirement—Students must:

• Be in grade twelve and have a primary enrollment status (code 10) or short-term enrollment (code 30) in CALPADS, and be enrolled for at least 90 cumulative calendar days (which includes weekends and holidays) with an enrollment gap of 30 days or less, or

• Be a graduate in July, August, or September (no minimum enrollment days required), or

• Be a graduate who is enrolled for at least 30 cumulative calendar days (which includes weekends and holidays) with an enrollment gap of 30 days or less, and has the following status in CALPADS:

o Foster Youth,o Homeless, oro Grade 11

Note: Foster Youth and Homeless non-graduates who are in grade twelve must meet the 90-day enrollment rule to be included in the DASS graduation rate.



What does cumulative calendar days mean? The following provides examples on the 90 and 30 cumulative calendar days used for the above enrollment requirement. 90 Cumulative Calendar Days Examples Example 1: Maria, a grade twelve student, was enrolled at a DASS school. She had the following number of enrollment and exit days at that DASS school:

• Enrolled for 30 days, • Exited for 5 days, • Re-enrolled for 20 days, • Exited for 3 days, and • Re-enrolled at the same school for 40 days.

Because she was enrolled for a total of 90 days (30 + 20 + 40) and had no single break in enrollment that exceeded 30 days, Maria meets the 90 cumulative day requirement. Example 2: Jorge, a grade twelve student, was enrolled at a DASS school. He had the following number of enrollment and exit days at that DASS school:

• Enrolled for 30 days, • Exited for 31 days, • Re-enrolled for 20 days, • Exited for 2 days, and • Re-enrolled for 40 days

Although Jorge had a total cumulative enrollment of 90 days (30 + 20 + 40), he had an enrollment gap of 31 days. Because the gap was greater than 30 days, the count is reset and begins again after the gap: 20 + 40 = 60. Based on this count, which yields a total cumulative enrollment of 60 days, the 90 cumulative day requirement is not met.

30 Cumulative Calendar Days Example Kendra, a grade twelve Foster Youth graduate, was enrolled at a DASS school. She had the following number of enrollment and exit days at that school:

• Enrolled for 20 days, • Exited for 40 days, • Re-enrolled for 10 days, • Exited for 15 days, and • Re-enrolled for 20 days

Although Kendra has a total cumulative enrollment of 50 days (20 + 10 + 20), she had an enrollment gap of 40 days. Because the gap was greater than 30 days, the count



for days begins again after the gap: 10 + 20 = 30. Because the total cumulative enrollment is 30 days, the 30-day cumulative enrollment requirement is met.

Does the 90-day enrollment and 30-day gap rule apply at the LEA-level too? Yes. The enrollment day rules also apply at the LEA level. For example: • Thalia, a grade twelve student, was enrolled at a comprehensive high school

before transferring to a DASS school in the same district, where she remained for the school year. She had the following number of enrollment and exit days at both schools: Comprehensive High School:

o Enrolled for 30 days o Exited for 12 days o Re-enrolled for 5 days then transferred to DASS school

DASS School:

o Enrolled for 25 days o Exited for 4 days o Re-enrolled for 20 days

Because the total number of days enrolled at the district was only 80 days (30 + 5 + 25 + 20), Thalia does not meet the 90 cumulative day requirement.

The following examples illustrate the business rules used for determining who is counted in the numerator for the DASS Graduation Rate. Example 1: Summer School Graduates

Student Enrollment Counted as a Graduate? Brittany, a grade twelve student, enrolls in a DASS school during the first week of May.

By June 16, when the school year ends, she has not graduated. She enrolls in the school’s summer school program on July 5 and receives a standard diploma on August 11.

Brittany is counted as a graduate at the DASS. Although Brittany does not have a total of 90 days of cumulative enrollment at the DASS school, she is still counted as a graduate because there is no enrollment requirement for summer school graduates.



Example 2: Foster Youth

Student Enrollment Counted as a Graduate? Doug is a foster youth student.

He enrolls in a DASS school during the first week of May and earns a GED, on June 16, when the school year ends.

Doug is counted as a graduate at the DASS school because the criteria for graduates at DASS schools include passage of a California High School Equivalency Test (i.e., GED, HiSET, and TASC).

Although Doug does not have a total of 90 days of cumulative enrollment at the DASS school, he is still counted as a graduate because the minimum enrollment for foster youth students is 30 cumulative calendar days.

Example 3: Enrollment Gap

Student Enrollment Counted as a Graduate? Oliver is a grade twelve student.

He enrolls in a DASS school in September and exits in January. He reenters the same DASS school during the first week of May and graduates, with a GED, on June 16, when the school year ends.

Oliver is not counted as a graduate at the DASS school because the enrollment gap (between January and May) is more than 30 cumulative calendar days. Since the count is reset when he returns to school in May, he does not meet the enrollment requirement of 90 cumulative days.

Jade is a grade twelve student.

She enrolls in a DASS school in September and exits in December. She reenters the same DASS school on March 1 and earns a GED on June 16, when the school year ends.

Jade is counted as a graduate at the DASS school because, although the enrollment gap is more than 30 cumulative calendar days, she has more than 90 cumulative days of enrollment (March 1 to June 16) after she reenters.



Example 4: Counting Enrollment Days at the School-Level

Student Enrollment Counted as a Graduate? Darryl is a grade He enrolls in a DASS school in Darryl is counted as a twelve student. September for ten days. He then non-graduate at the

exits for twenty days. He reenters DASS school because: in the same DASS school and (1) he was enrolled at theenrolls for 50 days. He exits school for 90 calendaragain for 25 days. He reenrolls days, (2) each of hisfor the same DASS school for 30 enrollment gaps was lessdays and does not earn a than 30 days, and (3) hediploma or certificate. did not earn a diploma or

certificate.

Who Counts in the Denominator of the DASS Graduation Rate?

The denominator of the DASS graduation rate is made up of all students who are:

• Graduates (including summer graduates)

• Grade twelve non-graduates who are enrolled for at least 90 cumulative calendardays from July 1 to June 30 with a primary enrollment (code 10) or short-termenrollment (code 30) in CALPADS and:

o Did not receive a standard diploma/high school equivalency certificate (such asa GED),

o Dropped out,

o Transferred to an adult education school/program (effective with the 2019Dashboard),

o Transferred to college (effective with the 2019 Dashboard), or

o Students with disabilities (SWDs) who did not participate in a transition program.

For the 2019 Dashboard, SWDs who received transition services during2018-19 were identified based on data populated in the electronicindividualized education program (IEP) system for the June 30th Report inthe California Special Education Management Information System(CASEMIS). LEAs are legally required, under the Individuals with DisabilitiesEducation Act (IDEA) to annually report valid and reliable data on allservices, including placement, transition services, received by students withan IEP through the electronic IEP system. For 2018–19 reporting, the datawas extracted from the electric IEP system, populated into the June 30thReport in CASEMIS, and certified by the Special Education Local Plan Area.LEAs could submit data corrections to this report through August 11, 2019.



The CASEMIS report reflects all the services that SWDs received throughout the year, based on their IEPs. (Note that for the 2019–20 school year, CASEMIS has been retired and CALPADS will be the official source for this data collection.)

Students are excluded from the denominator if their last enrollment record has one of the following exit codes:

E130 Died T180 Transfer to a private school T200 Transfer to a school outside of California T240 Transfer out of the U.S. T310 Transfer to a health facility T370 Transfer to an institution with a high school diploma program T460 Transfer to home school program

The scenarios below illustrate the business rules used for determining the numerator and denominator for the DASS Graduation Rate.

Example 1: Graduating Before 90 Days and Exiting the School

Student Enrollment Counted as a Graduate Albert is a grade twelve student.

He enrolls in a DASS school in March and stays enrolled for 80 days. He then earns a standard diploma before exiting out of the school.

Albert is counted neither as a graduate nor a non-graduate at the DASS school. He is not included in the denominator. Because students must be enrolled for at least 90 cumulative calendar days prior to graduating, Albert does not meet the criteria to be included in the calculations for the one-year graduation rate. However, if Albert was enrolled for at least 90-days in the district, he would be counted as a graduate at the district level.

Example 2: Graduating Before 90 Days and Remaining at School

Student Enrollment Counted as a Graduate Rachel is a grade twelve student.

She enrolls in a DASS school in September, earns her HiSET in mid-October, and exits. She re-enrolls in January and remains at the school through June without earning a standard diploma.

Rachel is counted neither as a graduate or a non-graduate at the DASS school. Although she received her HiSET at the school, she earned it before meeting the 90-day cumulative calendar enrollment requirement. She is excluded from the graduation rate calculation for the school.

Description CALPADS Exit Code



August 15 Cut Off Date and Summer Graduates Similar to the rules used for the combined graduation rate, for a student to be counted as a graduate in a DASS school, he or she must be entered as a graduate in CALPADS by August 15 of that school year. Students who graduate after August 15 are included as graduates in the next graduating class. For example:

• A student who attended summer school and graduated on August 15, 2019 would beincluded in the graduation rate for 2018–19 (i.e., 2019 Dashboard).

• A student who graduated on August 16 would be included in the graduation rate for2019–20 (i.e., 2020 Dashboard).

When Students Transfer Between Comprehensive and DASS Schools or Between DASS Schools, Who is Held Accountable?

If a student transfers between schools (i.e., between a comprehensive and DASS school or from one DASS school to another), only the last school is held accountable for student’s graduation status:

• If the last school of enrollment is a DASS school, then it must meet all criteria for theDASS Graduation Rate.

• If the last school of enrollment is a comprehensive high school, then it must meet thecriteria for the combined graduation rate.

The following scenarios explain which school is held accountable when students transfer. Example 1: Transfer to Traditional School

Student School 1 School 2 Which Graduation Rate is the Student Attributed to?

Marcie is a She enrolled She then Marcie is included in the grade 12 in a DASS transferred to a four-year graduation rate student who school for 120 traditional school for the traditional school enrolled in two days. for the last 30 only and is counted as a schools during days* and received graduate (included in her senior a standard both numerator and year. diploma. denominator). Eric is a grade He enrolled in He then transferred Eric is included in the 12 student a DASS to a traditional four-year graduation rate who enrolled in school for 120 school for the last for the traditional school two schools days. 30 days but did only and is counted as a during his not graduate. non-graduate (included senior year. in (denominator only).

*Keep in mind that there is no minimum enrollment requirements for traditional (orcomprehensive) schools. The traditional school is accountable for the student’s graduationstatus because that is last school that the student attended.



Example 2: Multiple School Transfers

Student School 1 School 2 School 3 Which Graduation Rate

is the Student Attributed to?

Melanie is a grade twelve student who transferred twice during her senior year.

For the first four months of the academic year, she enrolled in a DASS school.

In December, she transferred to a traditional high school, where she was enrolled for 95 days.

In March, she transferred to a new DASS school for the remainder of the year (June 30) but did not graduate.

Since Melanie was enrolled at School 3 (a DASS school) for at least 90 consecutive calendar days, and it was the last school of record, School 3 is accountable. She is counted as a non-graduate at School 3 (i.e., included in denominator but not numerator).

Example 3: Graduating Before Transfer

Student School 1 School 2 School 3 Which Graduation Rate

is the Student Attributed to?

Marc is a grade twelve student who transferred twice during his senior year.

For the first four months of the academic year, he enrolled in a traditional school.

In December, he transferred to a DASS school, and, after enrolling for 60 days, received a GED.

In February, he transferred to a new DASS school for the remainder of the year (June 30) and did not receive additional graduation certificates.

Although Marc received a GED at School 2, he was not enrolled there for 90 consecutive calendar days. Therefore, School 2 cannot count Marc as a graduate. School 3 is the last record of enrollment, and Marc was enrolled there for at least 90 days. Therefore, he is counted as a non-graduate at School 3 (i.e., included in denominator but not numerator).



When Students Transfer Between Comprehensive and DASS Schools or Between DASS Schools, Is the Student Included at the LEA-Level?

At the LEA-level, the graduation rate is “blended” and consists of students in comprehensive high schools and DASS schools. A student is only included once in the LEA’s graduation rate: either in the combined rate or in the DASS graduation rate. If a student transfers from a comprehensive high school to a DASS school within the same district, the student is removed from the district’s combined graduation rate and included in the DASS graduation rate as long as the student met the DASS graduation rate criteria. The following scenarios explain: (1) how to count enrollment days at the LEA-level and (2) how students are included in the district and school’s graduation rates when they transfer between non-DASS and DASS schools. Example 1: Counting Enrollment Days at the LEA-Level

Student School 1 Enrollment School 2 Enrollment Counted as a Graduate?

Ahmed is a grade twelve student.

He enrolls in a comprehensive high school for 25 days and then exits for 32 days. He re-enrolls in the same school for 15 days and then transfers to a DASS school in the same district.

At the DASS school, Ahmed enrolls for 14 days and then exits for 5 days. He reenters and enrolls for 29 days and passes the CHSPE.

Ahmed is counted as a non-graduate at the LEA because although he passed the CHSPE, he was not enrolled for 90 cumulative calendar days at the LEA.

Examples 2 and 3: Which Graduation Rate Are Students Included When They Transfer Between Non-DASS and DASS Schools?

• Example 2: On February 7, 2019, Daniela, a fourth-year grade twelve student, transferred from a non-DASS school to a DASS school. (Both schools are within the same district.) At the DASS school, Daniela is also placed in grade twelve. She does not graduate at the end of the school year.

How is Daniela included in the schools’ and district’s graduation rates? o School-Level: Because Daniela transferred out of the non-DASS school, she is

removed from this school's 2018–19 combined four- and five-year graduation rate. The DASS school is held accountable for Daniela because this is where she was last enrolled. Since Daniela did not graduate, she is included in the denominator but not the numerator of the DASS graduation rate.

o District-Level: Recall that the district-level graduation rate consists of students in the combined rate and students in the DASS graduation rate. Because Daniela is



included in the denominator of the DASS school’s graduation rate, she is included in the denominator of the district’s 2018–19 graduation rate under the DASS school (i.e., counted as a non-graduate).

• Example 3: On April 3, 2018, Robert, a senior in grade twelve, transferred from a non-

DASS school to a DASS school. (Both schools are in the same district.) At the DASS school, Robert is also placed in grade twelve. Robert did not graduate at the DASS school by end of the 2017–18 school year, and he re-enrolls there for a second year. At the end of that year (i.e., 2018–19), he earns the standard diploma.

How is Robert included in the schools’ and district’s graduation rates? Because this scenario covers two academic years, Robert is counted as follows: o 2017–18 school year: Because Robert transferred out of the non-DASS school in

2017–18, he is removed from the 2017–18 graduation rate at the non-DASS school. Since the DASS school is his last school of enrollment, Robert is included in the denominator of the DASS graduation rate for both the school and district. However, because he did not graduate by the end of the year, he is not counted in the numerator of the graduation rate, for either the school or district.

o 2018–19 school year: Because Robert graduated at the DASS school, he is

included as a graduate (i.e., counted in the both the numerator and denominator) in the DASS school’s 2018–19 DASS graduation rate. He is also included as a graduate in the district’s 2018–19 graduation rate.



Status and Change Calculation Formulas

Calculation Formulas for Comprehensive High Schools

Status

Total number of students in the Class of 2019 who graduated in four years by earning a regular high school diploma + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated

in five years by earning a regular high school diploma

divided by

Total number of students who entered grade nine for the first time in 2015–16 for the Class of 2019 + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in five years by

earning a regular high school diploma

Change


*Prior Year Status is not the Status from the 2018 Dashboard. It has been recalculated usingthe new Status formula noted above, which reflects the use of the combined four-and five-year graduation rate. The formula for the Prior Year Status is:

Total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in four years by earning a regular high school diploma + total number of students in the Class of 2017 who graduated

in five years by earning a regular high school diploma

divided by

Total number of students who entered grade nine for the first time in 2014–15 for the Class of 2018 + total number of students in the Class of 2017 who graduated in five years by

earning a regular high school diploma



Calculation Formulas for DASS SchoolsStatus

Total number of students who meet the graduation criteria between July 1, 2018 and June 30, 2019 + grade eleven and twelve students who graduated during the summer from July

1, 2019 to August 15, 2019

divided by

Total number of graduates + grade twelve non-graduates who were enrolled for at least 90 cumulative calendar days from July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019 with a primary

enrollment (code 10) or short-term enrollment (code 30) in CALPADS

Change

Current Status minus Prior Year Status

Calculation Formulas for LEAsStatus The data for comprehensive high schools and DASS schools’ are aggregated at the LEA level, except in the case of charter schools, which, under LCFF, are treated as their own LEAs. Therefore, their data are not included in their authorizers’ data.

• LEAs with only comprehensive high schools have a graduation rate based on thecombined four- and five-year graduation rate only.

• County offices with only DASS schools have a graduation rate based on the DASSgraduation rate only.

• LEAs with both comprehensive high schools and DASS schools have a graduationrate that incorporates both the combined rate and the DASS graduation rate as detailedbelow:

Total number of students in the Class of 2019 who graduated in four years by earning a regular high school diploma + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who

graduated in five years by earning a regular high school diploma + total number of 2019 DASS graduates

divided by

Total number of students who entered grade nine for the first time in 2015–16 for the Class of 2019 + total number of students in the Class of 2018 who graduated in five years by earning a regular high school diploma + total number of students in the 2019 DASS

graduation rate



Calculation Formulas for LEAs (Continued)

Change (for LEAs with both comprehensive high schools and DASS schools)


*Prior Year Status is not the Status from the 2018 Dashboard. It has been recalculatedusing the new Status formula noted above, which reflects the use of the combined four-and five-year graduation rate. The formula for the Prior Year Status is:

Total number of four-year graduates from the Class of 2018 who earned a regular high school diploma + total number of fifth-year graduates from the Class of 2017 who

earned a regular high school diploma in their fifth year + total number of 2018 DASS graduates

divided by

Total number of students who entered grade nine for the first time in 2014–15 for the Class of 2018 + total number of fifth-year graduates from the Class of 2017 who earned a

regular high school diploma in their fifth year + total number of students in the 2018 DASS graduation rate


• See Appendix A for statewide distributions, cut scores, and the five-by-five coloredtables. Note that there are separate distributions, cut scores, and five-by-fivecolored table for:

o Comprehensive high schools and districtso DASS schools and COEs that serve only DASS schools

• See section titled “Small Populations: Less than 150 Students” for the three-by-fivecolored table for the graduation rate. The three-by-five is automatically appliedwhen there are less than 150 students in the denominator of the suspension rate.


Please view the section titled “Student Groups” to access the student group definitions and data collection for this indicator.



Example 1: Topaz Unified School District (Serves both comprehensive high schools and DASS schools)

Because this LEA serves both traditional and DASS schools, its performance color will be based on (1) the combined four- and five-year graduation rate, and (2) the DASS graduation rate for both 2019 (Status) and 2018 (Change). Step 1: Determine Status

At the end of the 2018–19 school year, this school had:

• 215 graduates from the Class of 2019 (out of 250 students in the four-year cohort) • 3 fifth-year graduates from the Class of 2018 • 10 graduates from DASS schools (out of 50 Grade 12 DASS students)

Based on the above data, the current Status for this school is calculated as follows:

215 Graduates from Four-Year Cohort (Class of 2019) + 3 Fifth-Year Graduates (Class of 2018) + 10 Graduates from 2019 DASS Graduation Rate

divided by

250 Students in Four-Year Cohort (Class of 2019) + 3 Fifth-Year Graduates (Class of 2018)

+ 50 Students in 2019 DASS Graduation Rate

The LEA’s graduation rate for 2019 is 228 divided by 303 = 75.2%. Therefore, the LEA’s Status is 75.2%.


Change is: Current Status minus Prior Year Status*. *The prior year’s Status is not the Status from the 2018 Dashboard. The prior year Status has been re-calculated for the 2019 Dashboard using the combined graduation rate: At the end of the 2017–18 school year, this school had:

• 220 graduates from the Class of 2018 (out of 245 students in the four-year cohort) • 1 fifth-year graduate from the Class of 2017 • 13 graduates from DASS schools (out of 53 students in grade 12)

Based on the above data, the prior year Status for this school is calculated as follows:



220 Graduates from Four-Year Cohort (Class of 2018) + 1 Fifth-Year Graduate (Class of 2017) + 13 Graduates from 2018 DASS Graduation Rate

divided by

245 Students in Four-Year Cohort (Class of 2018) + 1 Fifth-Year Graduates (Class of 2017) + 53 Students in 2018 DASS Graduation Rate

The district’s prior year Status is 234 divided by 299 = 78.3%

Because the LEA’s current Status is 75.2% and the prior year Status is 78.3%, the Change is:

75.2% minus 78.3% = -3.1%.


Based on the district’s Status (75.2%) and Change (-3.1%) data, the performance level (color) is Orange. The five-by-five colored table on the following page illustrates how the performance level is derived.



Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Topaz Unified School District

Performance Level

Declined Significantly from Prior Year (by 5.1% or greater)

Declined from Prior Year (by 1.0% to 5.0%)


(declined or increased by less

than 1.0%)



Year (by 5.0% or greater)


Current Year

N/A Blue Blue Blue Blue

High 90.5% to less than 95.0% in

Current Year


Medium 80.0% to less than 90.5% in

Current Year


Low 68.0% to less than

80.0% in Current Year


Very Low Less than 68.0% in

Current Year

Red Red Red Red Red



Example 2: Lapis Lazuli DASS School


At the end of the 2018–19 school year, this school had:

• 84 students in grade 12 who met the 90-day cumulative enrollment criteria. Of these students, 48 were counted as graduates:

o 8 earned the standard diploma, o 15 passed the GED, o 13 passed the CHSPE, and o 12 earned the Special Education Certificate and were eligible for the CAAs

• One grade 11 graduate who earned the standard diploma and met the 30-day

cumulative enrollment criteria.

• Three Foster Youth graduates who earned the standard diploma and met the 30-day cumulative enrollment criteria.

• One Homeless graduate who earned the GED and met the 30-day cumulative

enrollment criteria. Based on the above data, the school has 53 graduates out of 89 students.

The school’s graduation rate for 2019 is 53 divided by 89 = 59.6%.

Therefore, the LEA’s Status is 59.6%.


Change is Current Status minus Prior Year Status*. *Prior Year Status: At the end of the 2017–18 school year, this DASS school had 87 students in grade 12. Of these students, 47 were counted as graduates:

o 12 earned the standard diploma, o 10 passed the GED, o 10 passed the CHSPE, o 2 passed the HiSET, and o 13 earned the Special Education Certificate and were eligible for the CAAs

• Two Foster Youth graduates who passed the GED and met the 30-day cumulative

enrollment criteria.



The prior year Status is: 49 divided by 89 = 55.1%

Because the school’s current Status is 59.6% and the prior year Status is 55.1%, the Change is:

59.6% minus 55.1% = 4.5%.


Based on the school’s Status (59.6%) and Change (4.5%) data, the school’s performance level (color) is “Red.” The five-by-five colored table below illustrates how a performance level is derived. Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Lapis Lazuli DASS School

Performance Level


Year (by more than 10.0%)




less than 3.0%)

Increased from Prior Year (by

3.0% to less than 10.0%)


from Prior Year (by 10.0% or

greater) Very High 90.5% or greater in

Current Year

N/A Blue Blue Blue Blue

High 80.0% to less than 90.5% in

Current Year



Current Year


Low 68.0% to less than 70.0% in

Current Year


Very Low Less than 68.0% in

Current Year

Red Red Red Red Red



Five-Year Graduation Rate Reported for Comprehensive High Schools Only In addition to approving the combined four-and five-year graduation rate, the SBE directed, at its July 2019 meeting, for the CDE to continue displaying the five-year graduation rates and to display the four-year graduation rates for informational purposes only. The CDE will post these data on the Dashboard in spring 2020.

Next Steps With the development of the DASS graduation rate, the SBE and stakeholders have expressed concerns that the implementation of the DASS Graduation Rate could spur student transfers between non-alternative and DASS schools, particularly at the high school level. In response, the SBE directed the CDE to conduct analyses of the enrollment patterns. The increase in student transfers between 2017–18 and 2018–19 was only 1.4 percent, which was considered not significant. The transfer counts were the highest in October, December, and January in both academic years. After March, the transfer counts declined. The data also showed consistent transfer patterns between the two academic years. (See August 2019 SBE Memorandum web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/pn/im/documents/memo-pptb-amard-aug19item01.docx.) The CDE will continue to conduct similar analyses to ensure that there is no substantial increase in enrollment patterns between non-alternative and DASS high schools.

https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/pn/im/documents/memo-pptb-amard-aug19item01.docx



Academic Engagement Local Indicators: Access to a Broad Course of Study

(Priority 7) LEAs annually measure its progress in the extent to which students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study that includes the adopted courses of study specified in the California Education Code for Grades 1–6 and Grades 7–12, as applicable, including the programs and services developed and provided to unduplicated students and individuals with exceptional needs. The adopted course of study for grades 1 to 6 is required to include instruction in the following areas of study: English; mathematics; social sciences; science; visual and performing arts; health; physical education; and other studies that may be prescribed by the governing board. The adopted course of study for grades 7 to 12 requires that courses in the following areas of study be offered: English; social sciences; foreign language or languages; physical education; science; mathematics; visual and performing arts; applied arts; and Career Technical Education. Self-Assessment Tool for Priority 7 LEAs provide a narrative summary of the extent to which all students have access to and are enrolled in a broad course of study by addressing, at a minimum, the following four prompts:

1. Briefly identify the locally selected measures or tools that the LEA is using to track the extent to which all students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study, based on grade spans, unduplicated student groups, and individuals with exceptional needs served.

2. Using the locally selected measures or tools, summarize the extent to which all students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study. The summary should identify any differences across school sites and student groups in access to, and enrollment in, a broad course of study, and may describe progress over time in the extent to which all students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study.

3. Given the results of the tool or locally selected measures, identify the barriers

preventing the LEA from providing access to a broad course of study for all students.

4. In response to the results of the tool or locally selected measures, what revisions, decisions, or new actions will the LEA implement, or has the LEA implemented, to ensure access to a broad course of study for all students?



Conditions & Climate

Suspension Rate Indicator (Grades K–12)


Beginning with the 2019 Dashboard, the following changes are reflected within this indicator:

• Using an aggregate suspension of one full day. With LEAs reporting all increments of suspension for all students, only students who have an aggregate suspension of one full day (i.e., their total suspension value equal 1.0 or more) will be included in the calculation of the suspension rate.


All LEAs and schools with 30 or more students enrolled for at least one day anytime within the school year—in kindergarten through grade twelve in both the current and prior year—will receive results for this indicator in their Dashboard.

• Example: A student who enrolls in a school on March 7 and transfers out of the school on March 10 would be included in the suspension rate denominator.

Data Source

The suspension data used for this indicator are sourced from data LEAs and schools submit to CALPADS.


1. Suspension Lengths: Aggregated versus Non-Aggregated. In DataQuest, students who have any suspensions—regardless of the length of the suspension—are included in the calculation of the suspension rate. For example, a student with one partial day suspension would be counted in the numerator of the suspension rate. In the Dashboard, however, students are only included in the suspension rate if they have an aggregated suspension of at least one full day (i.e., their total suspension value equals 1.0 or more). For example, if a student had two suspensions occurring on two different totaling 0.65, the student would not be included in the numerator of the suspension rate.

2. Inclusion of Students Who Attend Non-Public Schools (NPS). Another difference

between DataQuest and the Dashboard is the inclusion of students attended an NPS. In DataQuest, these students are counted, where in the Dashboard, they are not.



3. Inclusion of Charter Schools. In DataQuest, charter schools are included in theirauthorizer’s report, although they can be filtered out. In contrast, charter schools aretreated as LEAs under LCFF and are therefore not included in their authorizer’s reportfor the Dashboard.

Suspension Rate Rules

Only students with an aggregate suspension of one full day are counted in the suspension rate numerator. Beginning in 2018–19, LEAs were required to report all increments of suspension for all students (see the reporting rules below). Because students can have varying suspension length totals, the CDE will aggregate all suspensions to determine each student’s total suspension:

• For example, two half-day suspensions would be counted as a full day suspensionsince the two half-days total a full day: 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.0.

The following rules are used, for purposes of the Dashboard only, to determine which students are included/excluded in the suspension rate:

• Students who have an aggregate suspension of one full day (i.e., their totalsuspension value equal 1.0 or more) will be included in the calculation of thesuspension rate.

• Students who have an aggregate suspension of less than a full day (i.e., their totalsuspension value was less than 1.0) will be excluded from the calculation of thesuspension rate.

When calculating the aggregate, rounding is not used. For instance:

• If a student’s suspension increments were: 0.20, 0.25, 0.1, and 0.4, then thestudent’s aggregate suspension is:

0.20 + 0.25 + 0.1 + 0.4 = 0.95

The student’s suspension is not rounded to 1.0. Because this student’s suspension is less than one full day, this student will not be included in the suspension rate calculation.

Students who are enrolled under a primary or short-term enrollment and who have an aggregate suspension of one full day at any time during the school year, including the last day of school, will be counted as suspended for the calculation of this indicator. Students enrolled under other enrollment types (e.g., secondary enrollments) are not counted.

What is a “Suspension”?

Suspensions include “in-school” and “out-of-school” suspensions. (Note that “in-school” suspensions are when the principal or the principal’s designee assigns a student to a “supervised suspension classroom.”)



Both “in-school” and “out-of-school” suspensions are counted in the numerator (as “suspended”) of the suspension rate. The following codes in CALPADS are used to identify these suspension types:

CALPADS Discipline Action Category Code Suspension Type

110 In-school suspension 100 Out-of-school suspension

Students who are suspended at any time during the school year, including the last day of school, will be counted as suspended for the calculation of this indicator.

“Multiple Suspensions for One Student”: If a student is suspended multiple times, the student is counted as being suspended only once. For examples, see Table 25.

Table 25 Example Scenario

Same School

Within one academic year, Student A was suspended five different times within his/her school. Each suspension was for a full day. For suspension rate purposes, Student A would be counted as being suspended only once.

Same School

Within one academic year, Student A:

• Enrolled at School 1, was suspended twice (each for a full day),and then exited the school, and

• Enrolled back at School 1, was suspended once (for a full day),and exited the school.

Student A would be counted as being suspended once at School 1 (i.e., the student would be only counted once in both the numerator and denominator of the suspension rate).

Different Schools within

One LEA

Within one academic year, Student A was enrolled at three different schools within one LEA. In each school, Student A was suspended:

• Five times at School 1 (which equaled 3 full day suspensions),• Twice at School 2 (which equaled 1 full day suspension), and• Twice at School 3 (which equaled 2 full day suspensions)

In this instance, Student A would be counted as being suspended once each of the three schools and only once in the LEA.

in



Example Scenario

Different LEAs

Within one academic year, Student A was enrolled in two separate LEAs. In each LEA, Student A was suspended in more than one school:

LEA 1: • One full day suspension at School 1, and • Two full day suspensions at School 2

LEA 2: • One full day suspension at School 3, and • One full day suspension at School 4

In this instance, Student A would be counted as being suspended once in each of the four schools (i.e., Schools 1 through 4) and once in each LEA (i.e., LEA 1 and LEA 2).

When LEAs submit discipline data in CALPADS, they should consider the guidance provided to LEAs by the CALPADS Office (see CALPADS Flash #145). Per the guidance, LEAs should not include the following as suspensions:

• Reassignment to another education program or class at the same school, where the pupil will receive ongoing instruction,

• Referral to a certificated employee designated by the principal to advise pupils, or

• Removal from the class, but without reassignment to another class or program, for the remainder of the class period without sending the pupil to the principal or the principal’s designee

Suspension (Discipline) CALPADS Reporting Rules

Reporting Discipline Data for Students with Disabilities Due to changes to federal reporting requirements, the business rules for reporting discipline data are now the same for all students. Beginning in 2018–19, LEAs were required to report all increments of suspension for all students. In prior years, LEAs reported suspensions in any increments of a day for SWDs and only full-day suspensions for all other students. Now, LEAs must report all suspensions, regardless of the length of suspension. LEAs can submit decimal values for the length of suspensions in CALPADS. The CDE will examine all in-school and out-of-school suspensions and sum up the suspension values. Reporting Discipline Data for Nonpublic, Nonsectarian Schools (NPS) LEAs are required to report suspension and expulsion data for students attending NPS. However, these suspensions are not included in the calculations for the Dashboard.



If a student transfers from one school to another, do the student’s suspensions follow the student from school to school? For example, would a student’s suspension at the first school be included in the student’s second school? No. The student’s suspension would count in the first school but not at the second. As with all state indicators, the data used for the Dashboard are based on the data generated at each district or school. An LEA or school does not inherit another LEA/school’s data.

Key Differences

• Reverse Goal: Compared to some of the other state indicators, one key difference for this indicator is that the goal is reversed. For some of the other state indicators (such as Graduation Rate, CCI, ELPI, and Academic), the desired outcome is to have a high percent in Status and Change. However, for the Suspension Rate Indicator, the desired outcome is to have a low suspension rate and, therefore, a low percent for Status and Change.

• Charter Schools and Single School Districts

Both charter schools and single school districts will only be held accountable for their school-level performance level because: o Under the LCFF, charter schools are treated as districts. o Under the ESSA, single school districts are treated as schools.

Charter schools and single school districts could potentially receive two Dashboard reports: (1) an LEA report and (2) a school report. Since cut scores were set separately for LEAs and schools, different performance level (or color) results could be reported for a charter school and single school district. Such inconsistency would undermine the goal of developing one integrated local-state-federal accountability system. As a result, the SBE approved using only the school-level suspension rate cut scores for charter schools and single school districts. Automatic Assignment of an Orange Performance Level

LEAs and schools are automatically assigned an Orange performance level for the Suspension Rate Indicator if they did not submit suspension (or discipline) data in CALPADS for the current or prior Dashboard cycles. LEAs and schools that submit but do not certify their suspension (or discipline) data cannot receive a performance level higher than Orange.

• A Red performance level will be assigned if the LEA or school’s suspension data places the school at this performance color. The LEA and school will continue to receive a Red performance level and not be assigned an Orange.



The downloadable data files identify which LEAs or schools were assigned an Orange performance color. These data files can be accessed on the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ - see Data Files and Guide tab. The “certifyflag” field identifies which LEAs and schools received an automatic Orange performance level

Calculation Formula for Status

The suspension rate calculations for Status are based on the unduplicated number of students suspended within the 2018–19 school year.

Suspension Rate Formula

Number of Unduplicated Count of Students Suspended with an Aggregate Suspension of at Least One Full Day

divided by

* Cumulative Enrollment Multiplied by 100

*Cumulative enrollment = total number of students who were enrolled for at least one day at any time during the school year.


The calculation for Change is: Current Year Status minus Prior Year Status.

Current Year Status (2018–19 suspension rate) minus Prior Year Status (2017–18 suspension rate)

Cut Scores, Five-by-Five Colored Tables, and Three-by-Five- Colored Table

Multiple data simulations revealed that suspension data vary widely by LEA type (elementary, high, and unified) and school type (elementary, middle, and high). For example, suspension rates were higher at the middle school level than at the elementary school level. Therefore, unlike other state indicators, which use only LEA-level distributions to set the cut scores for Status and Change, the Suspension Rate Indicator uses both LEA-level and school-level distributions. The suspension cut scores are set based on LEA and school type. This results in six different sets of cut scores for Status and Change:

• Three sets based on LEA type distributions • Three sets based on school type distributions




Having six different sets of cut scores also resulted in six different five-by-five colored tables. Note that for K–12 schools, the cut scores and five-by-five tables for unified school district will be applied. Appendix A details the statewide distributions used to set the cut scores and the five-by-five colored tables for this indicator. See the section titled “LEA and School Type” for the rules used to determine an LEA and school’s type. See section titled “Small Populations: Less than 150 Students” for the three-by-five colored table for the suspension rate. The three-by-five is automatically applied when there are less than 150 students in the denominator of the suspension rate.

Student Groups and Data Collection Please view the section titled “Student Groups” to access the student group definitions and data collection processes and deadlines for this indicator.

Example 1: Ruby Elementary


During the 2018–19 school year, 380 students enrolled (for at least one day) at Ruby Elementary School. After aggregating these students’ suspension lengths:

• 20 had an aggregate suspension of less than one day (i.e., less than 1.0) • 15 had an aggregate suspension of one day or more (e.g., 3.9 total suspensions; 2.1

total suspensions; 6.5 total suspensions; etc.) The 15 students who had an aggregate suspension of one day or more are included once in the numerator of the suspension rate. Recall that even if a student is suspended multiple times for more than one full day, the student is counted as being suspended only once. The school’s calculated 2018–19 suspension rate and the school’s Status is:

15 divided by 380 = 3.9%.


Change is 2018–19 suspension rate minus 2017–18 suspension rate.

Because the school’s 2017–18 suspension rate was 5.6%, the Change is:

3.9% minus 5.6% = -1.7%.




Because Ruby Elementary School’s school type is “elementary,” the school’s performance level for the Suspension Rate Indicator is determined using the elementary school-level Status and Change cut scores identified in Appendix A. Based on Ruby Elementary School’s Status and Change results, the school made considerable progress over the previous year, reducing its suspension rate by 1.7%; yet it still has a 3.9% suspension rate, which is high. The school will receive a Yellow performance level as illustrated in the five-by-five colored table below. To receive a Green performance level for the 2019 Dashboard, the school will need to reduce their suspension rates to at least 3%. To maintain the Yellow performance level, the school will need to reduce their suspension rate by at least 0.3%. Elementary Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Ruby Elementary

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by greater than

2.0%)




less than 0.3%)

Declined from Prior


1.0%)


Year (by 1.0% or

greater)

Very Low 0.5% or less N/A Green Blue Blue Blue

Low Greater than 0.5% to 1.0%

N/A Yellow Green Green Blue

Medium Greater than 1.0% to 3.0%


High Greater than 3.0% to 6.0%


Very High Greater than

6.0% Red Red Red Orange Yellow



Example 2: Emerald Unified School District


During the 2018–19 school year, 900 students enrolled (for at least one day) at Emerald Unified. After aggregating these students’ suspension lengths:

• 65 had an aggregate suspension of less than one day (i.e., less than 1.0) • 34 had an aggregate suspension of one day or more (e.g., 1.0 total suspension; 3.6

total suspensions; 8.9 total suspensions; etc.) The 34 students who had an aggregate suspension of one day or more are included once in the numerator of the suspension rate. Recall that even if a student is suspended multiple times for more than one full day, the student is counted as being suspended only once. The school’s calculated 2018–19 suspension rate and the school’s Status is:

34 divided by 900 = 3.8%.


Change is 2018–19 suspension rate minus 2017–18 suspension rate.

Because the LEA’s 2017–18 suspension rate was 3.5%, the Change is:

3.8% minus 3.5% = 0.3%.


The LEA’s performance level for the Suspension Rate Indicator will be determined using the unified school district Status and Change cut scores identified in Appendix A. Based on Emerald Unified School District’s Status and Change results, the suspension rate increased by 0.3% from the previous year. The LEA will receive an Orange performance level as illustrated in the five-by-five colored table on the following page.



Unified Five-by-Five Colored Table Results for Emerald Unified School District

Performance Level


Year (by greater than 2.0%)



Year (declined or increased by

less than 0.3%)

Declined from Prior


2.0%)


Year (by 2.0% or

greater)

Very Low 1.0% or less in Current

Year

N/A Green Blue Blue Blue

Low Greater than

1.0% to 2.5% in

Current Year


Medium Greater than

2.5% to 4.5% in

Current Year


High Greater than

4.5% to 8.0% in

Current Year







Conditions & Climate Local Indicators: Basics (Priority 1), Parent and Family

Engagement (Priority 3), and Local Climate Survey (Priority 6) LCFF Priority 1: Basic (Availability of Textbooks, Adequate Facilities, and Correctly Assigned Teachers) LEAs will provide the information below:

• Number/percentage of misassignments of teachers of ELs, total teacher misassignments, and vacant teacher positions

• Number/percentage of students without access to their own copies of standards-aligned instructional materials for use at school and at home

• Number of identified instances where facilities do not meet the “good repair” standard (including deficiencies and extreme deficiencies)

Note: The requested information are all data elements that are currently required as part of the School Accountability Report Card (SARC).

LCFF Priority 3: Parent and Family Engagement LEAs will provide a narrative summary of its progress toward: (1) seeking input from parents/guardians in school and district decision making; and (2) promoting parental participation in programs. The summary of progress must be based either on information collected through surveys of parents/guardians or other local measures. Under either option, the LEA briefly describes why it chose the selected measures, including whether the LEA expects that progress on the selected measure is related to goals it has established for other LCFF priorities in its local control and accountability plan (LCAP). OPTION 1: Survey If the LEA administers a local survey to parents/guardians in at least one grade within each grade span that the LEA serves (e.g., K–5, 6–8, 9–12), the LEA will summarize the following in the text box provided in the Dashboard:

(1) The key findings from the survey related to seeking input from parents/guardians in school and district decision making;

(2) The key findings from the survey related to promoting parental participation in

programs; and



(3) Why the LEA chose the selected survey and whether the findings relate to the goals established for other LCFF priorities in the LCAP.

Please provide response here:

OPTION 2: Local Measures Summarize the following in the text box provided in the Dashboard:

(1) The LEA’s progress on at least one measure related to seeking input from

parents/guardians in school and district decision making;

(2) The LEA’s progress on at least one measure related to promoting parental participation in programs; and

(3) Why the LEA chose the selected measures and whether the findings relate to the

goals established for other LCFF priorities in the LCAP.

Examples of measures that LEAs might select are listed below.

A. Seeking Input in School/District Decision Making

1. Measure of teacher and administrator participation in professional development opportunities related to engaging parents/guardians in decision making.

2. Measure of participation by parents/guardians in trainings that also involve

school/district staff to build capacity in working collaboratively.

3. Measure of parent/guardian participation in meetings of the local governing board and/or advisory committees.

B. Promoting Participation in Programs

1. Measure of whether school sites have access to interpretation and translation

services to allow parents/guardians to participate fully in educational programs and individual meetings with school staff related to their child’s education.

2. Measure of whether school sites provide trainings or workshops for

parents/guardians that are linked to student learning and/or social-emotional development and growth.

4. Measure of whether school and district staff (teachers, administrators, support staff)

have completed professional development on effective parent/guardian engagement in the last two school years.



Please provide response here:

LCFF Priority 6: School Climate

LEAs will provide a narrative summary of the local administration and analysis of a local climate survey that captures a valid measure of student perceptions of school safety and connectedness in at least one grade within the grade span (e.g., K–5, 6– 8, 9–12) in a text box provided in the Dashboard. LEAs will have an opportunity to include differences among student groups, and for surveys that provide an overall score, such as the California Healthy Kids Survey, report the overall score for all students and student groups. This summary may also include an analysis of a subset of specific items on a local survey and additional data collection tools that are particularly relevant to school conditions and climate.

1. DATA: Reflect on the key learnings from the survey results and share what the LEA learned.

2. MEANING: What do the disaggregated results (if applicable) of the survey and other data collection methods reveal about schools in the LEA, such as areas of strength or growth, challenges, and barriers?

3. USE: What revisions, decisions, or actions has, or will, the LEA implement in response to the results for continuous improvement purposes? Why? If you have already implemented actions, did you see the results you were seeking?



Additional Information

This section covers general information for all indicators reported in the Dashboard by the CDE, as well as the Five-by-Five Placement Report that is posted on the CDE California Model Five-by-Five Placement Reports & Data web page.

Standard Rounding Rules The CDE applies standard rounding rules to both Status and Change. These values are rounded to the nearest tenth before they are displayed throughout the Dashboard and the Five-by-Five Placement Report. Change is calculated using the two years of Status results, prior to rounding:

Current Status (Not Rounded) minus Prior Status (Not Rounded) = Change (Rounded)

Therefore, LEAs and schools should not use the rounded Status values to calculate Change, because it could result in a different performance level (or color) than what is reported on the Dashboard Web site. New Schools Schools that newly opened during the 2018–19 academic year, and have current data, will have their Status data reported on the Dashboard. Because two years of data are required to calculate Change and to determine a performance level (color), new schools will not have Change data, performance level, or receive a Five-by-Five Placement Report. Closed Schools Any school that closed during the 2018–19 academic year will receive a Dashboard and the Five-by-Five Placement Reports as long as the school has data that can be used to report state indicators. County-District-School Code In order to have data displayed on the indicators reported in the Dashboard by the CDE, including the Five-by-Five Placement Reports, an LEA must have a county-district (CD) code and a school must have a county-district-school (CDS) code. Information regarding CDS code assignments is located on the CDE Schools and Districts web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/si/ds/.

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/si/ds/



Additional Reports: CCI, Participation Rate, Student Group, and Five-by-Five Reports

To provide LEAs with additional Dashboard data, the CDE has produced additional reports that are made available on the CDE Accountability Model & School Dashboard web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/:

• CCI Report: This report contains a more detailed break-down of the students whohave achieved the Prepared, Approaching Prepared, and Not Prepared performancelevels. The report was newly revised to include pie charts to graphically represent thedata. Heat charts are now included for the Prepared and Approaching Preparedperformance levels to help users quickly identify which measure have high or lowpercentages of students meeting the various criteria.

• Participation Rate Report: This report displays the number of students included inthe calculation of the participation rates (numerator and denominator), which can beused to determine if the DSF should be adjusted and by how much.

Note that the adjustment made to the DFS based on the participation rates will beavailable in the downloadable data files posted on the CDE Accountability Model &School Dashboard web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ (under Data Filesand Guide tab).

• Student Group Report: This report displays at-a-glance, the performance level(color) for all student groups across all state indicators. This report may be helpful forLEAs to use when reviewing the data for Differentiated Assistance for LEAs underLCFF since the criteria is based on student group performance.

• District Performance by County: This new report allows users to view a list of alldistricts in the county and their performance levels (colors) for each state indicator.The report also contains a student group filter so that overall performance levels canbe viewed for each district in a county via each student group. Finally, users canselect the column headers to access the detailed data for each indicator.

• Five-by-Five Placement Report: The section below details this report.

Five-by-Five Placement Report

As noted in earlier sections of this guide, California’s accountability and continuous improvement system is based on a five-by-five colored table which produces 25 performance results. Each result is represented by five colors (i.e., Blue [Highest Performance]; Green; Yellow; Orange; and Red [Lowest Performance]). To help LEAs and schools identify which one of the 25 performance results they achieved on the state indicators, the CDE produced the Five-by-Five Placement Report, which identifies the exact location of the LEA, school, or





student group in the table. Has Anything Changed with the Five-by-Five Report Since the 2018 Dashboard? The functionality of the five-by-five report has been updated to:

• Include state level reports (type in “State” or “State of California” in the search) • Include the ability to view cut scores by school type for the:

o Suspension Rate Indicator o Graduation Rate Indicator o Academic Indicator

Who Receives a Five-by-Five Report? All LEAs and schools that receive a report in the Dashboard will receive a Five-by-Five Placement Report. How Do the Five-by-Five Reports Relate to the Dashboard? The Dashboard displays the Status, Change, and performance levels (or colors), for each applicable indicator. The Five-by-Five Placement Report identifies the exact location/performance of the LEA, school, or student group on the five-by-five colored table. For example, the five-by-five colored table for the Graduation Rate Indicator has four Green performance levels. If School A received a Green performance level, the Five-by-Five Placement Report will identify which of the four Green performance levels the school achieved. LEAs and schools can use the information in the Five-by-Five Placement Report to identify how much positive improvement (Change) is necessary to maintain a performance level (color) or to move up a performance level. (Note that the accountability system is a continuous improvement system which requires LEAs and schools to continuously improve in order to maintain a performance level or achieve a higher performance level [color]). What is included in the Five-by-Five Placement Reports?

• State-level Five-by-Five Placement Reports The state report identifies the number of schools that received each performance level (color) across the state. The number of schools is hyperlinked to access the list of schools receiving that color. The direct link to the Dashboard can be accessed by selecting the “View California School Dashboard” hyperlink.

• District-Level Five-by-Five Placement Reports

The district report identifies the performance level (color) for all the schools within the district. It also provides the exact location of all the schools on the five-by-five colored table. A viewer can use the district report to quickly compare how all schools in the



district performed on a particular indicator. Each school identified in the district five-by-five colored table is hyperlinked to allow easy access to the school’s Five-by-Five Placement Report. The report also contains a link to the district’s student group information, as well as a direct link to the district’s Dashboard. The student group data can be accessed by selecting the “View Student Groups Five-by-Five Report” hyperlink. The direct link to the Dashboard can be accessed by selecting the “View California School Dashboard” hyperlink.

• School-Level Five-by-Five Placement Reports

The school report identifies the performance level (or color) for all the significant student groups and also provides the exact location of all the significant student groups on the five-by-five colored table.

• Summary Table at the Bottom of Each Report

At the bottom of each Five-by-Five Placement Report, a summary table is displayed identifying either the: o The total number of schools in each performance level (or color), or o The total number of student groups in each performance level (or color).

• View Detailed Data

This feature, available on both district and school-level reports, provide not only the Status level, Change level, and performance levels (or colors), it also includes the following data:

o Number of students included in the numerator (in current and prior year) o Number of students included in the denominator (in current and prior year) o Rates (such as graduation rates for current and prior year) o Flags (used when an LEA or school is assigned an Orange performance level)

A viewer will also be able to filter by specific student groups (i.e., EL, SED, SWD, and race/ethnicity).

• Downloadable Data Files

The statewide data files for the Five-by-Five Placement Reports (and the Dashboard) are downloadable from the CDE California School Dashboard and System of Support web page at https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ see DataFiles and Guide tab. These files are provided in both Excel and Text formats. Associated record layouts and a glossary containing data definitions are also available on this web page.




• Individual LEA, school, and student group data files are also available through the View Detailed Data on the Five-by-Five Placement Reports (select the “Download Data” link). This feature allows: o An LEA to download data for the LEA, all of their schools, and student groups o A school to download school and student group data



District LEA and Charter LEA Eligibility for Differentiated Assistance

Eligibility Criteria for Assistance that Are Applied to District LEAs and COEs Differ from Criteria Applied to Charter School LEAs in 2019

Eligibility for assistance determinations for district LEAs and COEs are based on student group performance in priority areas and is based on state and local performance on the 2019 Dashboard. Eligibility determinations for assistance for charter school LEAs (hereafter referred to as charter LEAs) are not based on priority areas but are based on three years of student group performance on state indicators from the 2017, 2018, and 2019 Dashboards. Because of the differences in the criteria applied to these two types of LEAs, the technical guide will address the criteria for district LEAs and COEs in one section and for charter LEAs in a separate section.

LCFF Eligibility for Assistance Criteria Applied to District LEAs and COEs

Under the LCFF statutes, district LEAs and COEs will become eligible for differentiated assistance based on:

• Student group performance in two or more LCFF state priority areas, or• Performance on local indicators in two or more priority areas, or• A combination of student group performance in one state priority area and local

indicator performance in one different priority area.

District LEAs and COEs that are not eligible for assistance based on these criteria will be eligible for general assistance. LCFF assistance determinations are made on an annual basis. Any LEA that was formerly determined eligible for differentiated assistance that no longer meets the criteria will be eligible for general assistance.

Criteria by Priority Area

Table 26 on the following page identifies the student group and local indicator criteria by LCFF state priority area. Both the state and local indicator results reported in the 2019 Dashboard will be used to determine the eligibility of district LEAs and COEs for differentiated assistance.



Table 26

LCFF State Priority Areas 1 – 5

LCFF State Priority Areas 6 – 10

Basics (Priority 1) • Not Met for Two or More Years on

Local Performance Indicator

School Climate (Priority 6) • Red on Suspension Rate Indicator, or • Not Met for Two or More Years on

Local Performance Indicator Implementation of State Academic Standards (Priority 2) • Not Met for Two or More Years on


Access to a Broad Course of Study (Priority 7) • Not Met for Two or More Years on Local

Performance Indicator

Parent Engagement (Priority 3) • Not Met for Two or More Years on


Outcomes in a Broad Course of Study (Priority 8) • Red on College/Career Indicator

Pupil Achievement (Priority 4) • Red on both English language arts and

math tests, or • Red on English language arts or math

test and Orange on the other test • For 2019 only, an =ELPI Status Level

of ‘Very Low’ meets the criteria in Priority 4 [Note: On the 2020 Dashboard, ELPI will have Status, Change, and a Color.]

Coordination of Services for Expelled Pupils – COEs Only (Priority 9) • Not Met for Two or More Years on


Pupil Engagement (Priority 5) • Red on Graduation Rate Indicator, or • Red on Chronic Absence Indicator

Coordination of Services for Foster Youth – COEs Only (Priority 10) • Not Met for Two or More Years on




Examples of How District LEAs and COEs Become Eligible for Differentiated Assistance

For a district LEA or COE to become eligible for differentiated assistance in 2019, at least one student group must meet specific criteria (identified in Table 26) in two or more different LCFF state priority areas, OR at least two local indicators must meet the criteria, OR criteria may be met by a combination of a student group in one priority area and one local indicator in a different priority area.

Example 1: Diamond Elementary School District Performance levels achieved by Hispanic (HI) student group in all applicable indicators:

LCFF State Priority Area State/Local Indicators Performance Level Priority 4 ELA Red Priority 4 Mathematics Orange Priority 5 Chronic Absenteeism Yellow Priority 6 Suspension Green Priorities 1, 2, 3, 6, & 7 Local Indicators Met

To meet criteria for Priority 4, a student group must have: • Red on both the ELA and Mathematics tests, or • Red on the ELA or Mathematics test and Orange on the other test, or • Very Low on ELPI (ELPI only represents EL student group and ‘Very Low’ ELPI status

level meets criteria only for the 2019 Dashboard)

Diamond Elementary’s HI student group met the criteria for Priority 4 because it had Red on ELA and Orange on Mathematics.

To meet criteria for Priority 5, a student group must have: • Red on the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator

Diamond Elementary’s HI student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 5 because it had Yellow on the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator.

To meet criteria for Priority 6, a student group must have: • Red on the Suspension Rate Indicator

Diamond Elementary’s HI student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 6 because it had Green on the Suspension Rate Indicator.

For a Local Indicator to meet criteria in a Priority area, local indicator must have: • Not Met For Two or More Years

Diamond Elementary did not meet the criteria on any Local Indicator as it had a



performance level of ‘Met’ on its local indicators in all applicable priority areas.

Because Diamond Elementary’s HI student group did not meet the criteria in two or more LCFF State Priority Areas AND the district LEA did not meet the criteria on local indicators in two or more priority areas OR meet the criteria through a combination of student group and local indicator in two or more priority areas, Diamond Elementary School District is not eligible for Differentiated Assistance.

(Note: In the example above and the examples that follow, only one student group is included. For most district LEAs, multiple student groups will receive a performance level on the Dashboard and will be included in the analyses for potential eligibility for assistance under LCFF.)

Example 2: Jade Union High School District Performance levels achieved by Socioeconomically Disadvantaged (SED) student group

in all applicable indicators: LCFF State Priority Area State Indicator Performance Level

Priority 4 ELA Yellow Priority 4 Mathematics Orange Priority 5 Graduation Rate Red Priority 6 Suspension Rate Yellow Priority 8 CCI Red Priority 1, 2, 3, 6, & 7 Local Indicators Not Met



Jade Union High’s SED student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 4 because it had Yellow on ELA and Orange on Mathematics.

To meet criteria for Priority 5, a student group must have: • Red on the Graduation Rate Indicator

(Chronic Absenteeism Indicator in Priority 5 only applies to LEAs serving students in grades K-8.)

Jade Union High’s SED student group met the criteria for Priority 5 because it had Red on the Graduation Rate Indicator.




Jade Union High’s SED student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 6 because it had Yellow on the Suspension Rate Indicator.

To meet criteria for Priority 8, a student group must have: • Red on the CCI Indicator

Jade Union High’s SED student group met the criteria for Priority 8 because it had Red on the CCI Indicator.


Jade Union High School District did not meet the criteria on any Local Indicator as it had a performance level of ‘Not Met’ on its local indicators in all applicable priority areas.

(Note: ‘Not Met’ means local indicators were ‘Not Met’ for only one year. To meet the criteria, a local indicator needs to have ‘Not Met For Two or More Years.’)

Because Jade Union High School District’s SED student group met the criteria in two or more LCFF State Priority Areas (namely, Priority 5 and Priority 8), this district LEA is eligible for Differentiated Assistance.

Example 3: Crystal Unified School District Performance levels achieved by English Learner (EL) student group in all applicable indicators:

LCFF State Priority Area State Indicator Performance Level Priority 4 ELA Orange Priority 4 Mathematics Yellow Priority 4 ELPI Very Low Priority 5 Chronic Absenteeism Red Priority 5 Graduation Rate Yellow Priority 6 Suspension Rate Green Priority 8 CCI Orange Priority 1, 2, 3, 6, & 7 Local Indicators Not Met



Crystal Unified’s EL student group met the criteria for Priority 4 because it had a ‘Very Low’ ELPI Status on the 2019 Dashboard.



To meet criteria for Priority 5, a student group must have: • Red on the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator, or • Red on the Graduation Rate Indicator

Crystal Unified’s EL student group met the criteria for Priority 5 because it had Red on the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator.


Crystal Unified’s EL student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 6 because it had Green on the Suspension Rate Indicator.

To meet criteria for Priority 8, a student group must have: • Red on the CCI Indicator

Crystal Unified’s EL student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 8 because it had Orange on the CCI Indicator.


Crystal Unified School District did not meet the criteria on any Local Indicator as it had a performance level of ‘Not Met’ on its local indicators in all applicable priority areas. Because Crystal Unified School District’s EL student group met the criteria in Priority 4 (ELPI Status of ‘Very Low’) and Priority 5 (Red on Chronic Absenteeism), this district LEA is eligible for Differentiated Assistance.

Example 4: Opal County Office of Education (Opal COE) Performance levels achieved by African American (AA) student group in all applicable

indicators: LCFF State Priority Area State Indicator Performance Level (Color)

Priority 4 ELA Orange Priority 4 Mathematics Orange Priority 5 Chronic Absenteeism Orange Priority 5 Graduation Rate Red Priority 6 Suspension Rate Yellow Priority 8 CCI Orange Priority 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, & 9 Local Indicators Met Priority 10 Local Indicator Not Met For Two or More

Years




level meets criteria only for the 2019 Dashboard) Opal COE’s AA student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 4 because it had Orange on ELA and Orange on Mathematics. To meet criteria for Priority 5, a student group must have: • Red on the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator, or • Red on the Graduation Rate Indicator Opal COE’s AA student group met the criteria for Priority 5 because it had Red on the Graduation Rate Indicator. To meet criteria for Priority 6, a student group must have: • Red on the Suspension Rate Indicator Opal COE’s AA student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 6 because it had Yellow on the Suspension Rate Indicator. To meet criteria for Priority 8, a student group must have: • Red on the CCI Indicator

Opal COE’s AA student group did not meet the criteria for Priority 8 because it had Orange on the CCI Indicator. For a Local Indicator to meet criteria in a Priority area, local indicator must have: • Not Met For Two or More Years

Opal COE met the criteria on the Local Indicator in Priority 10 (Coordination of Services for Foster Youth) because its performance level for this local indicator was ‘Not Met For Two or More Years.’ Because Opal COE’s AA student group met the criteria in Priority 5 (Graduation Rate) and met the criteria for its Local Indicator in Priority 10, this COE is eligible for Differentiated Assistance. (Note: If a district LEA or COE does not meet a local indicator for two or more years, all students groups are deemed to have not met the local indicator.)

Because Opal COE’s AA student group met the criteria in one LCFF State Priority Area (Priority 5) and one local indicator (Priority 10), this COE is eligible for Differentiated Assistance.



LCFF Eligibility for Assistance Criteria Applied to Charter LEAs

Schools that are charter schools as of the current Dashboard year are considered charter LEAs for purposes of LCFF assistance determinations even if the schools’ status changed between traditional and charter during the prior two Dashboard years. Both direct-funded and locally-funded charter schools are considered LEAs under LCFF. Charter LEAs will be eligible for technical assistance under LCFF for the first time in the 2019‒20 school year. Under the LCFF statutes, charter LEAs will be eligible for differentiated assistance based on student group performance on three out of four consecutive years on the Dashboard. As there are only three years of Dashboard data available as of 2019, charter LEAs will be assessed for assistance eligibility based on their student group performance on state indicators on the 2017, 2018, and 2019 Dashboards.

Certain criteria for LCFF assistance eligibility apply to all charter LEAs while other criteria differ depending on the number of student groups that a charter LEA has. All charter LEAs must meet the following criteria to be included in the pool of charter schools assessed for differentiated assistance eligibility:

• Charter LEA must have three years of Dashboard data (i.e., 2017, 2018, and 2019 Dashboards)

• Charter LEA must have been a charter school in 2018‒19 school year [Note: Dashboard data from all three years will be included for eligibility determinations in cases where a school had a charter status in the 2018‒19 school year, but was a non-charter school in one or both of the prior school years.]

• Charter LEA must be an active charter school in the 2019‒20 school year

While all charter LEAs must meet the criteria above to be assessed for eligibility for assistance under LCFF, the application of other criteria hinges on the number of student groups at that charter LEA. The definition of student group is critical in determining which criteria applies to the charter LEA. For purposes of assessing charter LEA eligibility for assistance under LCFF, a student group is counted if it received at least one color on a state indicator in at least one of the three Dashboard years. For 2019 only, receiving an ELPI Status (a proxy for color) also counts for the EL student group. A student group that has at least one Red indicator for a given Dashboard year (or for the EL student group in 2019, an ELPI Status of ‘Very Low’) has met the criteria for that year.

Because eligibility criteria applied to charter LEAs with three or more student groups differs from criteria applied to charter LEAs with two or fewer student groups, the criteria details and examples for these two charter LEA categories are addressed separately.



Eligibility Criteria Applied to Charter LEAs with Three or More Student Groups To be eligible for differentiated assistance, a charter LEA with three or more student groups must have at least three student groups that received a Red performance level on at least one state indicator for the last three Dashboards (for EL student group, ELPI Status of ‘Very Low’ meets the criteria in 2019). The ‘Red’ performance color does not need to be on the same indicator for all three Dashboards, but the student group must be the same.

The definition of student group is any group that received at least one performance color in one or more Dashboards. As a result, a charter LEA may fall under the ‘Three or More Student Groups’ criteria even if one or more of the student groups only had a performance color in one or two of the Dashboards.

The following examples illustrate the criteria applied to charter LEAs that have three or more student groups. (Please see Appendix F for the descriptive text for each example.)

Example 1: Garnet Charter School

Year English Learner (EL) Group

Hispanic Group

White Group

Student with Disabilities (SWD) Group

2019 ELA, math, chronic,

suspension, ELPI Very Low

ELA, math (no color) ELA, math, chronic, suspension

2018 ELA, math, chronic, suspension ELA, math (no color) ELA, math, chronic,

suspension

2017 ELA, math, suspension ELA, math ELA, math,

suspension ELA, math, suspension

Garnet Charter School is not eligible for differentiated assistance under LCFF. Although this charter LEA has four student groups, only two of the four student groups met the criteria of having at least one Red indicator (or ‘Very Low’ ELPI Status for the EL student group in 2019) in each of the three Dashboard years. The EL and SWD student groups met the criteria in all three years. The Hispanic student group only met the criteria in 2019, and the White student group only met the criteria in 2017. However, Garnet Charter School will be eligible for general assistance.



Example 2: Aquamarine High Charter School

Year EL Group Hispanic Group White Group SWD Group

2019

ELA, math, suspension,

graduation, CCI ELPI Very Low


graduation, CCI (no color)

ELA, math , suspension,

graduation, CCI

2018 ELA, math, suspension,

graduation, CCI


graduation, CCI (no color)


graduation, CCI

2017 ELA, math, suspension, graduation

ELA, math , suspension, graduation



Aquamarine High Charter School is eligible for differentiated assistance under LCFF. Although this charter LEA’s White student group did not meet the criteria for having at least one Red indicator in all three Dashboard years, Aquamarine High Charter School met the criteria of having at least one Red indicator (or ELPI Status of ‘Very Low’ for EL student group in 2019) in all three Dashboard years for its EL, Hispanic, and SWD student groups.

Eligibility Criteria Applied to Charter LEAs with Two or Fewer Student Groups

If a charter LEA has two or fewer student groups that receive a color in one or more of the three Dashboards, the charter LEA cannot be excluded from eligibility if one of the student groups does not receive a performance color in one or more Dashboards. However, a student group that did not receive a color in one or more of the three Dashboards must have at least one Red performance color in the year it received a color.

The following examples illustrate the criteria applied to charter LEAs that have two or fewer student groups.



Example 1: Topaz Elementary Charter School Year EL Group Hispanic Group White Group

2019 ELA, math,

suspension, ELPI Very Low

ELA, math, chronic (no color)

2018 ELA, math, suspension

ELA, math, suspension (no color)

2017 ELA, math ELA, math (no color)

Topaz Elementary Charter School is eligible for differentiated assistance under LCFF. This charter LEA had fewer than 30 students (the required n-size) in the White student group for all three Dashboards. As a result, the White student group received no performance colors in any of the three Dashboards placing Topaz Elementary in the rules for charter LEAs with fewer than three student groups. This charter LEA met the criteria in its EL and Hispanic student groups because these groups had at least one Red performance color (or an ELPI Status of ‘Very Low’ for its EL student group in 2019) in any year that the student group received a color.

Example 2: Jasper Charter School Year African American Group Hispanic Group

2019 ELA, math, chronic, suspension ELA, math, chronic, suspension

2018 ELA, math, chronic, suspension (no color)


Jasper Charter School is eligible for differentiated assistance under LCFF. This charter LEA had two student groups that had the required n-size of 30 students in 2019 but only one student group that had the required n-size to receive a color in 2018 and 2017. Jasper Charter School’s African American student group had at least one Red performance color in each of the three Dashboards, and its Hispanic student group received at least one Red performance color in the one year that the student group received a color. Therefore, Jasper Charter School met the criteria for charter LEAs with fewer than three student groups and is eligible for differentiated assistance.



Example 3: Citrine Union Charter School

Year African American Group Socioeconomically Disadvantaged (SED) Group

2019 ELA, math, suspension, graduation, CCI

ELA, math, suspension, graduation, CCI

2018 ELA, math, suspension, graduation, CCI (no color)

2017 ELA, math, suspension, graduation (no color)

Citrine Union Charter School is not eligible for differentiated assistance under LCFF. In order to be eligible, this charter LEA must have received at least one Red performance level for both student groups in the years that the student group received a color. Although the African American student group met this criteria, the SED student group did not receive a Red performance level in 2019.

Example 4: Emerald Charter School Year Hispanic Group SED Group


2018 ELA, math, chronic, suspension ELA, math, suspension

2017 (no color) ELA, math, suspension

Emerald Charter School is eligible for differentiated assistance under LCFF. Although neither of the charter LEA’s two student groups received performance colors in all three Dashboard years, the LEA had at least one student group with a Red indicator in each of the three Dashboards and both student groups received at least one Red performance level in each year that the student group received a color. Because the Hispanic student group received at least one Red performance color in 2019 and 2018 (the two years that the Hispanic group received a color) and the SED student group received at least one Red indicator in 2018 and 2017 (the two years that the SED group received a color), Emerald Charter School meets the eligibility criteria for differentiated assistance.



Example 5: Sapphire Charter School Year African American Group SED Group


ELA, math, suspension, graduation


ELA, math, suspension, graduation

2017 (no color) (no color)

Sapphire Charter School is not eligible for differentiated assistance under LCFF. A charter LEA must have at least one student group with at least one Red indicator in each of the three Dashboards. [Note: For schools with two or fewer student groups, the student group does not need to be the same in all three years and the indicator does not need to be the same in all three years, but all three Dashboards must have at least one Red performance Dashboard.] Although the African American and SED student groups had at least one Red performance color in each of year that they received a color, neither student group received a performance color in 2017. Therefore, Sapphire Charter School did not meet the eligibility criteria for differentiated assistance under LCFF.

Resources For information on support and resources available for LEAs, please visit the following CDE web pages:

• California’s System of Support: https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/sw/t1/csss.asp • Quality Schooling Framework: https://www.cde.ca.gov/qs/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/sw/t1/csss.asp

https://www.cde.ca.gov/qs/



School Eligibility for Comprehensive Support and Improvement

In accordance with the ESSA, schools are eligible for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) when they meet the criteria in one of the following two categories:

1. The ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools’ category, for 2019, consists of schools that have a two–year average combined four-and five-year high school graduation rate below 68 percent. This graduation rate criteria applies to both Title I–funded schools and schools that did not receive Title I funds. In addition, schools must have graduation rate data for both 2018 and 2019 to be eligible for support in this category.

2. The ‘CSI–Lowest Performing Schools’ category, for 2019, consists of schools that received Title I funding for the 2018–19 school year and are the lowest performing based on the 2019 Dashboard data. At least five percent of the Title I–funded schools must be included in this category.

School eligibility categories are hierarchical. Schools can only be eligible in one category for any given school year. The first eligibility group is ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools.’ Schools eligible for CSI based on graduation rate that happened to be Title I–funded are removed from the pool prior to the determination of Title I–funded schools in the ‘CSI–Lowest Performing Schools’ category.

Beginning in 2018–19, schools will be evaluated on an annual basis to determine continued eligibility for CSI or exit. Schools that become eligible for CSI based on the ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools’ criteria are evaluated annually in order to determine continued eligibility for support. Schools eligible for CSI based on the ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools’ in the 2018–19 year will be reevaluated in the 2019–20 year to determine continued eligibility or exit. Schools with a two-year average combined four-and five-year graduation rate at 68 percent or above will no longer be eligible for CSI based on the ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools’ criteria.

Schools that become eligible for CSI based on the ‘CSI Lowest–Performing Schools’ criteria are evaluated annually in order to determine continued eligibility for support or exit. Schools initially eligible for CSI based on the ‘CSI Lowest–Performing Schools’ in the 2018–19 year will be reevaluated in the 2019–20 year to determine continued eligibility or exit. A school is no longer eligible for support based on the ‘CSI Lowest–Performing Schools’ criteria when the school has improved performance so that it no longer meets the criteria that were used to determine initial eligibility. For any state indicator that had a change in color that would make a school no longer eligible for support based on the original eligibility criteria, an additional check will be made to ensure the Status number for any such state indicator has increased from the Status number in the prior year by at least by one decimal point before the school will exit school eligibility. A school, therefore will have to improve its performance across indicators (including an increase in Status in the relevant indicator(s)) so that it no



longer has any combination of color-coded performance levels that meet the criteria used for initial eligibility.

Because Dashboard Alternative School Status (DASS) schools are included in the 2019 Dashboard, the same school eligibility criteria under ESSA will apply to DASS schools as will apply to non-DASS schools.

Schools with Graduation Rate Below 68 Percent (CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools) For 2019, any school with a school level combined four-and five-year graduation rate less than 68 percent averaged over two years will be eligible for CSI. Schools must have a combined four-and five-year graduation rate in both 2018 and 2019 to be eligible for support in this second group. Schools are eligible for this category regardless of their Title I funding status. [Note: ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools’ will be eligible based on a three–year average combined four-and five-year graduation rate in the future.]

Lowest-performing Title I Schools (CSI–Lowest Performing Schools) After, schools determined to be eligible for ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate’ are removed from the pool of Title I–funded schools, schools that meet the criteria for ‘CSI–Lowest Performing Schools’ are determined next. The lowest-performing Title I schools—as required by ESSA—will be determined based on the data in the 2019 Dashboard, using the color combinations that schools receive at the school level (i.e., not student group level) on the Dashboard state indicators. The selection criteria are:

• Schools with all red indicators; • Schools with all red but one indicator of any other color; • Schools with all red and orange indicators; and • Schools with five or more indicators where the majority are red.

Because there will be no ELPI Change included on the 2019 Dashboard, a performance level (or color) cannot be determined for the ELPI state indicator. The ELPI state indicator criteria for CSI–Lowest Performing Schools will be based on ELPI Status only. An ELPI Status level of ‘Very Low’ will be used as a proxy for the color ‘Red’ as meeting the criteria for the ELPI state indicator in 2019–20 CSI Lowest–Performing Schools determinations. ELPI color will be available beginning with the 2020 Dashboard and used in 2020–21 CSI Lowest–Performing Schools determinations.

Examples of How Schools Become Eligible for CSI For a school to be eligible for CSI, the school must either have a two–year average combined four-and five-year high school graduation rate below 68 percent, regardless of the Title I funding status of the school or have received Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year and meet the criteria for lowest performing schools.



Example 1: Ruby Union High School Ruby Union High School did not receive Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year.

High School Graduation Rates for 2018 and 2019: Year Graduation Rate 2019 65.4 2018 59.8

In the example above, the two-year graduation rate average is 62.6 percent. Although Ruby Union High School did not receive Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year, it was eligible for CSI based on its two–year average combined four-and five year graduation rate of 62.6 percent. Because Ruby Union High School had a graduation rate in both 2018 and 2019 and met the criteria of having a two–year average graduation rate below 68 percent, this school is eligible for CSI in the ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate School’ category.

Example 2: Amethyst Elementary School Amethyst Elementary School received Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year.

Performance levels achieved in all applicable indicators on 2019 Dashboard: State Indicators Performance Level ELA Red Mathematics Orange Chronic Absenteeism Orange Suspension Orange

Because Amethyst Elementary received all red and orange on its 2018 Dashboard state indicators at the school level, this school is eligible for CSI in the ‘CSI–Lowest Performing Schools’ category.



Example 3: Jasper Middle School Jasper Middle School received Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year.

Performance levels achieved in all applicable indicators on 2019 Dashboard: State Indicators Performance Level ELA Red Mathematics Red Chronic Absenteeism Orange Suspension Yellow

Because Jasper Middle School received a yellow in addition to the orange on the 2019 Dashboard, this school does not meet the criteria for CSI eligibility.

Example 4: Emerald High School Emerald High School received Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year.

Performance levels achieved in all applicable indicators on 2019 Dashboard: State Indicators Performance Level ELA Red Mathematics Red Graduation Rate Red Suspension Yellow CCI Orange

High School Graduation Rates for 2018 and 2019:

Year Graduation Rate 2019 55.7 2018 49.9

In the example above, the two-year graduation rate average is 52.8 percent. Emerald High School is a DASS school. As mentioned earlier, the same criteria for school eligibility for support under ESSA apply to DASS schools as to non-DASS schools. Although Emerald High School did receive Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year and met the criteria of having five or more indicators with the majority being red on the 2019 Dashboard, this school is eligible for CSI in the ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate School’ category based on having a two–year average graduation below 68 percent. Because schools can only be eligible in one category, in the hierarchy of eligibility determinations for CSI, schools are evaluated for eligibility in the ‘CSI–Low Graduation Rate Schools’ category first, followed by the ‘CSI–Lowest Performing Schools’ category.



Example 5: Quartz High School Quartz High School received Title I funds for the 2018–19 school year.

Performance levels achieved in all applicable indicators on 2019 Dashboard:

State Indicators Performance Level ELA Orange Mathematics Red ELPI Status Very Low Graduation Rate Green Suspension Red

Quartz High School (a Title I school) is eligible for CSI in the CSI–Lowest Performing Schools’ category because it met the “Five or more indicators where the majority are Red (or ELPI Status of “Very Low”)” criterion.

Small Schools Program for CSI Program Purpose The purpose of this program is to identify schools with an N-size less than 30 for CSI. Program Issue Schools with an N-size less than 30 do not receive performance levels (colors) on the Dashboard, which are the determining indicators for CSI for schools with an N-size greater than 30. Identification Rules

• Only schools with a total enrollment of at least 11 students will be reviewed.

• Elementary and middle schools will be identified for CSI if they have an ELA and math status of very low level 1 and Chronic Absenteeism of 20.1% or more.

• High schools will be identified if they have less than 68% of their eligible students

graduate (using the one-year grad rate used by DASS schools since it provides better equity) and grade 11 ELA and math status of very low level 1.

• CSI/Status will be identified (not targeted support and improvement {TSI}/ Change).

If you have any questions regarding the Small Schools Program for CSI, please contact the CDE School Improvement and Support Office by email at [email protected] or by phone at 916-319-0833.




School Eligibility for Targeted/Additional Targeted Support and Improvement

In accordance with California’s ESSA State Plan, schools that are not eligible for CSI, are eligible for Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) if they have one or more student group(s) that for two consecutive years (based on the 2018 Dashboard and 2019 Dashboard) meet(s) the same criteria as applied in determining eligibility for the ‘CSI–Lowest Performing Schools’ category. Schools that received Title I funds and schools that did not receive Title I funds are both eligible for TSI. TSI determination of eligibility occurs annually. The criteria used to determine eligibility of schools for TSI and the criteria used to determine schools eligible for Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (ATSI) are identical. The CDE first began determining schools eligible for ATSI in the 2018‒19 school year and school eligibility for ATSI typically occurs on a three–year cycle. However, the CDE will determine schools eligible for ATSI again in 2019–20 in order to align the ESSA eligibility cycle to the three year LCFF cycle. All schools that met the criteria for TSI will be moved into the ATSI category in the 2019–20 year. Schools not eligible for CSI that have one or more student group(s) that meet(s) any of the following criteria based on the 2018 Dashboard and 2019 Dashboard will be eligible for the ATSI category for the 2019–20 school year:

• All red indicators (student group must have at least two indicators); • All red but one indicator of any other color; • All red and orange indicators; and • Five or more indicators where the majority are red.

A student group may meet the criteria based on a different color combination from one year to the next, but the same student group must meet the criteria in both years. Because there will be no ELPI Change included on the 2019 Dashboard, a performance level (or color) cannot be determined for the ELPI state indicator. The ELPI state indicator criteria for ATSI will be based on ELPI Status only. An ELPI Status level of ‘Very Low’ will be used as a proxy for the color ‘Red’ as meeting the criteria for the ELPI state indicator in 2019–20 ATSI determinations. ELPI color will be available beginning with the 2020 Dashboard and used in 2020–21 TSI determinations. Because TSI determinations are made annually, exit criteria do not apply to this category. However, schools that become eligible for ATSI are evaluated annually in order to determine continued eligibility for support or exit. Schools initially eligible for ATSI in the 2018–19 year will be reevaluated in the 2019–20 year to determine continued eligibility or exit. A school is no longer eligible for support based on the ATSI criteria when the school has improved performance so that it no longer meets the criteria that were used to determine initial eligibility. For any state indicator that had a change in color that would make a student group(s) no longer eligible based on the original criteria that made the student group(s) eligible, an additional check will be made to ensure the Status number for any such state



indicator has increased from the Status number in the prior year by at least by one decimal point before the student group(s) will exit school eligibility for ATSI. A school, therefore, will have to improve its performance across indicators (including an increase in Status for the relevant indicator(s)) for the relevant student group(s) so that it no longer has any combination of color-coded performance levels that meet the criteria used for initial eligibility.

Examples of How Schools Become Eligible for Targeted/Additional Targeted Support and Improvement Because the eligibility criteria for TSI and ATSI are identical and, for the 2019–20 school year, all schools eligible for TSI will be assigned to the ATSI category, the examples that follow will refer to ATSI. In addition, while schools may be eligible based on more than one student group meeting the criteria, the examples give information on a single student group.

Example 1: Onyx High School Performance levels achieved by Multiple Races (MR) student group in all applicable indicators:

State Indicators 2018 Dashboard 2019 Dashboard ELA Orange Red Mathematics Red Red Graduation Rate Orange Red Suspension Yellow Orange CCI Orange Orange Onyx High School was not eligible for ATSI for the 2019–20 school year based on its Multiple Races student group. Although this student group met the criteria of ‘all red and orange indicators’ based on the 2019 Dashboard, it failed to meet the criteria based on the 2018 Dashboard when it had a Yellow indicator in addition to Red and Orange.

Example 2: Agate Middle School Performance levels achieved by English Learner (EL) student group in all applicable indicators: State Indicators 2018 Dashboard 2019 Dashboard ELA Red Orange Mathematics Red Red ELPI Status n/a Very Low Chronic Absenteeism Red Orange Suspension Green Orange

Agate Middle School is eligible for ATSI because the EL student group met:

• All Red but one indicator of any other color criterion on the 2018 Dashboard; and • All Red and ELPI Very Low Status and Orange indicators criterion on the 2019

Dashboard.



Example 3: Aquamarine K–12 Charter School Performance levels achieved by Students with Disabilities (SWD) student group in all applicable indicators: State Indicators 2018 Dashboard 2019 Dashboard ELA Orange Red Mathematics Red Red Graduation Rate Red Red Chronic Absenteeism n/a Orange Suspension Yellow Orange CCI Red Orange Aquamarine K–12 Charter School was eligible for ATSI for the 2019–20 school year based on its SWD student group. The school’s SWD student group met the criteria of ‘five or more indicators where the majority are red’ based on the 2018 Dashboard and the criteria of ‘all red and orange indicators’ based on the 2019 Dashboard.



Appendix A Distributions, Cut Scores, and Five-by-Five Color Tables

This section contains the statewide distributions used to set the cut scores approved by the State Board of Education (SBE), including the five-by-five color tables that identify the 25 performance levels (or colors) for each state indicator.

Academic Performance English Language Arts/Literacy – Grades Three through Eight (Applied to Non-DASS K–8 and K–12 Schools, Unified School Districts, and Student Groups)

Status is the current average Distance from Standard (DFS).

Table A displays the cut scores for each Status level approved by the SBE at the November 2017 State Board of Education (SBE) meeting. These cut scores are applied to traditional (non-Dashboard Alternative School Status [DASS] schools and all LEAs.

Table A Status Level Status Cut Score

Very Low Average DFS is -70.1 or lower. Low Average DFS is -5.1 to -70 points.

Medium Average DFS is -5 to +9.9 points. High Average DFS is 10 to 44.9 points.

Very High Average DFS is 45 points or higher.



Appendix A

Academic Indicator—ELA Grades Three through Eight (Cont.)

Table B displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table B Percentile ELA Average DFS Status Levels

5 -72.61 Very Low 5.8 -70.00 Low 10 -59.30 Low 15 -51.07 Low 20 -44.74 Low 25 -39.50 Low 30 -34.20 Low 35 -29.20 Low 40 -24.14 Low 45 -19.70 Low 50 -15.60 Low 55 -10.80 Low 60 -5.70 Low

61.1 -5.00 Medium 65 .27 Medium 70 7.60 Medium

71.7 10.00 High 75 14.08 High 80 22.52 High 85 31.07 High 90 42.91 High

90.5 45.00 Very High 95 60.07 Very High




Change is the difference between the current Status and the prior year Status. Table C displays the cut scores for each Change level as approved at the November 2017 SBE meeting. These cut scores are applied to all K–8 and K–12 non-DASS and DASS schools, including Elementary and Unified School Districts and all associated student groups.

Table C Change Level Change Cut Score

Declined Significantly Average DFS declined by more than 15 points. Declined Average DFS declined by 3 to 15 points.

Maintained Average DFS declined by less than 3 points or increased by less than 3 points.

Increased Average DFS increased by 3 to less than 15 points. Increased Significantly Average DFS increased by 15 or more points.

Table D displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table D Percentile ELA Change from Prior Year to Current Year Change Level

5 -20.99 Declined Significantly 10 -15.00 Declined 15 -11.50 Declined 20 -9.40 Declined 25 -7.30 Declined 30 -5.70 Declined 35 -4.60 Declined 40 -3.30 Declined

43.8 -3.0 Declined 45 -2.20 Maintained 50 -1.20 Maintained 55 -.20 Maintained 60 .90 Maintained 65 2.40 Increased

65.6 3.0 Increased 70 3.64 Increased 75 5.30 Increased 80 7.00 Increased 85 9.37 Increased 90 13.68 Increased

90.8 15.00 Increased Significantly 95 20.30 Increased Significantly

Appendix A




Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for Non-DASS K-8 and K-12 Schools, Elementary and Unified School Districts, and Student Groups

Table E identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores presented earlier. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that LEAs and schools would earn based on their “Status” and “Change” results. This five-by-five colored table reflects the color layouts approved at the November 2017 SBE meeting.

Table EDistrict ELA Academic Indicator – Distance from Standard

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by more than

15 points)

Declined from Prior Year

(by 3 to 15 points)



increased by less than 3

points)

Increased from Prior Year

(by 3 to less than 15 points)


from Prior Year (by 15 points or

more)

Very High 45 points or

higher in Current Year


High 10 to 44.9 points in Green Green Green Green Blue

Current Year

Medium -5 points to +9.9



Low -5.1 to -70points in

Current Year


Very Low -70.1 points or

lower in CurrentYear


Appendix A



Mathematics – Grades Three through Eight (Applied to Non-DASS K–8 and K–12 Schools, Elementary and Unified School Districts, and Student Groups)

Status is the current average DFS. Table F displays the cut scores for each Status level as approved at the November 2017 SBE meeting.

Table F Status Level Status Cut Score

Very Low Average DFS is -95.1 points or lower. Low Average DFS is -25.1 to -95 points.

Medium Average DFS is -25 to less than zero. High Average DFS is zero to 34.9 points.

Very High Average DFS is 35 points or higher.

Table G displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table G Percentile Mathematics Average DFS Status Levels

5 -99.2 Very Low 6 -95.0 Low

10 -83.60 Low 15 -75.8 Low 20 -70.10 Low 25 -63.9 Low 30 -57.6 Low 35 -52.00 Low 40 -46.1 Low 45 -41.1 Low 50 -36.3 Low 55 -31.0 Low 60 -25.2 Low 60.6 -25.0 Medium 65 -18.4 Medium 70 -10.5 Medium 75 -4.0 Medium 78 0.0 High 80 3.5 High 85 13.8 High 90 28.6 High 91.9 35.0 Very High 95

46.4 Very High

Appendix A



Academic Indicator—Mathematics Grades Three through Eight (Cont.)

Change is the difference between the current Status and the prior year Status. Table H displays the cut scores for each Change level as approved at the November 2017 SBE meeting. These cut scores are applied to all K–8 and K–12 non-DASS and DASS schools, including Elementary and Unified School Districts and all associated student groups.

Table H Change Level Change Cut Score

Declined Significantly Average DFS declined by more than 15 points. Declined Average DFS declined by 3 to 15 points.

Maintained Average DFS declined by less than 3 points or increased by less than 3 points.

Increased Average DFS increased by 3 to less than 15 points. Increased Significantly Average DFS increased by 15 or more points.

Table I displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution. Table I

Percentile Math Change from Prior Year to Current Year Math Change Levels 5 -19.91 Declined Significantly

9.7 -15.00 Declined 10 -13.94 Declined 15 -10.41 Declined 20 -8.20 Declined 25 -6.35 Declined 30 -4.50 Declined 35 -3.39 Declined 39 -3.00 Declined 40 -2.20 Maintained 45 -1.20 Maintained 50 -0.10 Maintained 55 0.90 Maintained 60 1.90 Maintained

62.1 3.00 Increased 65 3.10 Increased 70 4.50 Increased 75 5.90 Increased 80 7.98 Increased 85 10.00 Increased 90 13.40 Increased

90.8 15.00 Increased Significantly 95 20.24 Increased Significantly

Appendix A



Academic Indicator—Mathematics Grades Three through Eight (Cont.)

Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for Non-DASS K-8 and K-12 Schools, Elementary and Unified School Districts, and Student Groups

Table J identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that LEAs and schools would earn based on their “Status” and “Change” results. This five-by-five colored table reflects the color layout approved at the November 2017 SBE meeting.

Table J District Math Academic Indicator – Distance from Standard

Performance Levels


from Prior Year (by


Declined from Prior





points)

Increased from Prior Year (by 3 to less than 15 points)


from Prior Year (by 15

points or more)




High 0 to 34.9 points in

Current Year


Medium -25 points to less than 0



Low -25.1 to -95



Very Low -95.1 points or lower in

Current Year


Appendix A



ELA – Grade Eleven (Applied to Non-DASS High Schools Serving Grades 7–12, High School LEAs, and Student Groups)

Status is the current average DFS. Table K displays the cut scores for each Status level as approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting.

Table K Status Level ELA Status Cut Score

Very Low DFS is -45.1 points or lower Low DFS is -0.1 to -45 points

Medium DFS is 0 to 29.9 points High DFS is 30 points to 74.9 points

Very High DFS is 75 points or higher

Table L displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table L Percentile ELA Average DFS Status Levels

5 -85.5 Very Low 10 -65.7 Very Low

14.1 -45 Low 15 -41.6 Low 20 -30.3 Low 25 -21.3 Low 30 -14.2 Low 35 -9.3 Low 40 -0.5 Low

40.5 0.0 Medium 45 5.3 Medium 50 12.7 Medium 55 15.9 Medium 60 21.6 Medium

63.7 30 High 65 31.8 High 70 38 High 75 49.6 High 80 54.6 High 85 63.1 High

88.9 75 Very High 90 76 Very High

95 91.4 Very High

Appendix A



Academic Indicator—ELA Grade Eleven (Cont.)

Change is the difference between the current Status and the prior year Status. Table M displays the cut scores for each Change level as approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting. These cut scores are applied to all non-DASS and DASS high schools serving grades 7–12, including high school LEAs and all associated student groups.

Table M Change Level Change Cut Score

Declined Significantly Average DFS declined by 15.1 points or more Declined Average DFS declined by 3.0 points to 15 points

Maintained Average DFS declined by 2.9 points or increased by 2.9 points Increased Average DFS increased by 3 points to 14.9 points

Increased Significantly Average DFS increased by 15 points or more

Table N displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table N Percentile ELA Change from Prior Year to Current Year ELA Change Levels

5 -46.3 Declined Significantly 10 -36.3 Declined Significantly 15 -30.4 Declined Significantly 20 -27.2 Declined Significantly 25 -23.4 Declined Significantly 30 -19.4 Declined Significantly 35 -16.7 Declined Significantly

39.9 -15.0 Declined 40 -14.9 Declined 45 -12.8 Declined 50 -10.7 Declined 55 -8.1 Declined 60 -6 Declined 65 -4.2 Declined 70 -3.1 Declined

70.6 -3 Declined 75 -0.4 Maintained 80 2.2 Maintained

81.7 3.0 Increased 85 7.3 Increased 90 12.2 Increased

92.4 15 Increased Significantly 95 18.2 Increased Significantly

Appendix A Appendix A




Five-by-Five Color Tables and Performance Levels for Non-DASS High Schools Serving Grades 7–12, High School LEAs, and Student Groups

Table O identifies the Status and Change cut scores, including the performance levels (or colors) This five-by-five colored table reflects the color layout approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting.

Table O

District ELA Grade 11 Academic Indicator – Distance from Standard

Performance Level



Declined from Prior



Year (declined or increased by 2.9 points or

less)


Year (by 3 to less than

14.9 points)



more)

Very High +75 points or

higher inCurrent Year


High +30 to +74.9



Medium 0 to +29.9 points in Current

Year


Low -0.1 to -45 points in

Current Year


Very Low -45.1 pointsor lower in

Current Year


Appendix A



Mathematics – Grade Eleven (Applied to Non-DASS High Schools Serving Grades 7–12, High School LEAs, and Student Groups)

Status is the current average DFS. Table P displays the cut scores for each Status level as approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting.

Table P Status Level Grade 11 - Math Status Cut Score

Very Low Average DFS is -115.1 points or lower Low Average DFS is -60.1 to -115 points

Medium Average DFS is -0.1 to -60 points High Average DFS is 0 points to 24.9 points

Very High Average DFS is 25 points or higher

Table Q displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table Q Percentile Mathematics Average DFS Status Levels

5 -180.8 Very Low 10 -148.6 Very Low 15 -134.6 Very Low 20 -125.8 Very Low

23.8 -115.0 Low 25 -110 Low 30 -100.7 Low 35 -93.3 Low 40 -83.3 Low 45 -72.7 Low 50 -67.35 Low 55 -64.1 Low

58.2 -60.0 Medium 60 -56.6 Medium

65 -50.4 Medium 70 -40.6 Medium 75 -27 Medium 80 -17.6 Medium 85 -7.2 Medium

86.8 0 High 90 14.0 High 93.6 25.0 Very High 95 44.0 Very High

Appendix A



Academic Indicator—Mathematics Grade Eleven (Cont.) Change is the difference between the current Status and the prior year Status. Table R displays the cut scores for each Change level as approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting. Table R:

Change Level Math - Change Cut Score Declined Significantly Declined 15.1 points or more

Declined Declined 3 points to 15 points Maintained Declined by 2.9 or increased by 2.9 points Increased Increased by 3 points to 14.9 points

Increased Significantly Increased by 15 or more points

Table S displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table S: Percentile Math Change from Prior Year to Current Year Math Change Levels

5 -31.4 Declined Significantly 10 -26.5 Declined Significantly 15 -23.1 Declined Significantly

19.2 -20.0 Declined Significantly 20 -19.4 Declined Significantly

25.4 -15.0 Declined 25 -15.3 Declined 30 -12.3 Declined 35 -10.8 Declined 40 -8.4 Declined 45 -6.9 Declined 50 -4.1 Declined

52.9 -3.0 Declined 55 -2.4 Maintained 60 -0.9 Maintained 65 0.6 Maintained 70 2.3 Maintained

70.7 3.0 Increased 75 4.4 Increased 80 7.5 Increased 85 11.0 Increased

89.9 15 Increased Significantly 90 15.6 Increased Significantly 95

25.5 Increased Significantly

Appendix A



Academic Indicator—Mathematics Grade Eleven (Cont.)

Five-by-Five Color Tables and Performance Levels for Non-DASS High Schools Serving Grades 7–12, High School LEAs, and Student Groups

Table T identifies the Status and Change cut scores, including the performance levels (or colors) This five-by-five colored table reflects the color layout approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting.

Table T:

District Math Grade Eleven Academic Indicator – Distance from Standard

Performance Level



15 points)

Declined from Prior



(declined or increased by 2.9 points or

less)



14.9 points)



more)




High 0 to +24.9 points in

Current Year


Medium -0.1 to -60.0



Low

-60.1 to -115 points in

Current Year





Appendix A



Academic Indicator for DASS Schools English Language Arts/Literacy – Grades Three through Eight

Academic Indicator—ELA Grades Three through Eight (Cont.) - DASS

In September 2019, the SBE approved separate Status cut scores for DASS schools for the Very Low and Low levels only. These cut scores will be applied to K–8 and K–12 DASS schools. (Note that revisions were not made to any Change cut scores.)

Table U displays the approved cut scores.

Table U Status Level Status Cut Score

Very Low Average DFS is -125.1 points or lower Low Average DFS is -5.1 to -125.0 points

Medium Average DFS is -5 to +9.9 points High Average DFS is 10 to 44.9 points


Appendix A



Academic Indicator—ELA Grades Three through Eight (Cont.) – DASS

Table V displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide DASS school-level distribution.

Table V

Percentile ELA Average DFS Status Levels 5 -174.1 Very Low 10 -166.2 Very Low 15 -156 Very Low 20 -152.45 Very Low 25 -146.4 Very Low 30 -139.2 Very Low 35 -134.9 Very Low

37.8 -125 Low 40 -125.35 Low 45 -102.7 Low 50 -90.6 Low 55 -84.6 Low 60 -79.25 Low 65 -75.6 Low 70 -66.3 Low 75 -55.5 Low 80 -39.8 Low 85 -34.8 Low

88.8 -5 Medium 90 -4.5 Medium 95 -1.6 Medium

95.6 10 High 99.9 45 Very High

Appendix A




Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for DASS K-8 and K-12 Schools

Table W identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores for DASS K–8 and K–12 schools. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that DASS schools would earn based on their Status and Change results. This five-by-five colored table reflects the modified Status cut scores approved at the September 2019 SBE meeting.

Table WDASS Schools ELA Academic Indicator – Distance from Standard

Performance Level



15 points)


(by 3 to 15 points)




points)

Increased from Prior Year

(by 3 to less than 15 points)


from Prior Year (by 15 points or

more)





Current Year


Medium -5 points to +9.9



Low -5.1 to -125.0



Very Low -125.1 points orlower in Current

Year


Appendix A



Mathematics – Grades Three through Eight Academic Indicator—Mathematics Grades Three through Eight (Cont.) – DASS

In September 2019, the SBE approved separate Status cut scores for DASS schools for the Very Low and Low levels only. These cut scores will be applied to K–8 and K–12 DASS schools. Table X displays the approved cut scores.

Table X Status Level Status Cut Score

Very Low Average DFS is -175.1 points or lower Low Average DFS is -25.1 to -175.0 points

Medium Average DFS is -25 to less than 0 High Average DFS is 0 to 34.9 points


Table Y displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide DASS school-level distribution.

Percentile Mathematics Average DFS Status Levels 5 -225.4 Very Low 10 -216.9 Very Low 15 -212.8 Very Low 20 -205.25 Very Low 25 -189.6 Very Low 30 -183.6 Very Low 35 -178.2 Very Low 40 -177.1 Very Low

42.3 -175 Low 45 -174.7 Low 50 -172.1 Low 55 -170.1 Low 60 -157.5 Low 65 -147.2 Low 70 -138 Low 75 -135.8 Low 80 -124.5 Low 85 -111.8 Low 90 -67.2 Low 95 -54 Low

97.8 -25 Medium 99.8 0 High 99.9 35 Very High

Appendix A



Academic Indicator—Mathematics Grades Three through Eight (Cont.) Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for DASS K-8 and K-12 Schools

Table Z identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores for DASS K–8 and K–12 schools. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that DASS schools would earn based on their Status and Change results. This five-by-five colored table reflects the modified Status cut scores approved at the September 2019 SBE meeting.

Table Z

Performance Levels


from Prior Year (by


Declined from Prior





points)

Increased from Prior Year (by 3 to less than 15 points)


from Prior Year (by 15

points or more)





Current Year


Medium -25 points to less than 0 Yellow Yellow Yellow Green Green points in

Current Year Low

-25.1 to -175.0 points Orange Orange Orange Yellow Yellow

in Current Year




Appendix A



ELA – Grade Eleven DASS Status Cut Scores

In September 2019, the SBE approved separate Status cut scores for DASS schools for the Very Low and Low levels only. These cut scores will be applied to high schools serving grades 7–12 DASS schools. Table AA displays the approved cut scores.

Table AA Status Level Status Cut Score

Very Low Average DFS is -110.1 points or lower Low Average DFS is -1 to -110.0 points

Medium Average DFS is -0.9 to 29.9 points High Average DFS is 30 to 74.9 points


Table AB displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide DASS school-level distribution.

Table AB

Percentile ELA Average DFS Status Levels 5 -170.4 Very Low 10 -160.9 Very Low 15 -153.5 Very Low 20 -148.1 Very Low 25 -141.85 Very Low 30 -136 Very Low 35 -125.9 Very Low 40 -121.3 Very Low 45 -118.1 Very Low 50 -112.35 Very Low

53.9 -110 Low 55 -109.3 Low 60 -103.4 Low 65 -95.6 Low 70 -85.5 Low 75 -78.2 Low 80 -69.4 Low 85 -58.3 Low 90 -45.6 Low 95 -21.1 Low

98.1 0 Medium 98.8 30 High 99.4 75 Very High

Appendix A




Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for DASS Schools Grades 7–12

Table AC identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores for DASS high schools serving grades 7–12. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that DASS schools would earn based on their Status and Change results. This five-by-five colored table reflects the modified Status cut scores approved at the September 2019 SBE meeting.

Table AC

District ELA Grade 11 Academic Indicator – Distance from Standard

Performance Level



Declined from Prior




less)



14.9 points)



more)


higher inCurrent Year


High +30 to +74.9



Medium 0 to +29.9 points in Current

Year


Low -0.1 to -110.0




or lower inCurrent Year


Appendix A



Mathematics – Grade Eleven

DASS Status Cut Scores

In September 2019, the SBE approved separate Status cut scores for DASS schools for the Very Low and Low levels only. These cut scores will be applied to high schools serving grades 7–12 DASS schools. Table AD displays the approved cut scores.

Table AD

Table AE

Percentile Mathematics Average DFS Status Levels 5 -242.2 Very Low 10 -233.3 Very Low 15 -228.3 Very Low 20 -226.6 Very Low 25 -223.2 Very Low 30 -218.5 Very Low 35 -214.6 Very Low 40 -211.8 Very Low 45 -208 Very Low 50 -202.3 Very Low 55 -196.8 Very Low 60 -189.2 Very Low 65 -185.9 Very Low

66.9 -185 Low 70 -182.5 Low 75 -179.2 Low 80 -172.9 Low 85 -167.2 Low 90 -141.1 Low 95 -124.8 Low

96.2 -115 Low 98.8 -60 Medium 99.3 0 High 99.9 25 Very High

Status Level Status Cut Score Very Low Average DFS is -185.1 points or lower

Low Average DFS is -60.1 to -185.0 points Medium Average DFS is -0.1 to -60 points

High Average DFS is 0 points to 24.9 points Very High Average DFS is 25 points or higher

Appendix A



Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for DASS High Schools Serving Grades 7–12

Table AF identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores for DASS high schools serving grades 7–12. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that DASS schools would earn based on their Status and Change results. This five-by-five colored table reflects the modified Status cut scores approved at the September 2019 SBE meeting.

Table AF

District Mathematics Grade 11 Academic Indicator – Distance from Standard

Performance Level



Declined from Prior




less)


Year (by 3 to less than 14.9

points)



more)




High 0 to +24.9 points in Green Green Green Green Blue

Current Year Medium

-0.1 to -60 points in Yellow Yellow Yellow Green Green

Current Year Low

-60.1 to -185 points in Orange Orange Orange Yellow Yellow

Current Year Very Low

-185.1 points or lower in

Current Year


Appendix A



College/Career Indicator Status is based on the percentage of students who met the “Prepared” benchmark on the CCI model. Table AG displays the cut scores for each of the “Status” levels, which were approved by the SBE in September 2017.

Table AG Status Level Status Cut Score

Very Low Percent of “Prepared” students is less than 10%. Low Percent of “Prepared” students is 10% to less than 35%.

Medium Percent of “Prepared” students is 35% to less than 55%. High Percent of “Prepared” students is 55% to less than 70%.

Very High Percent of “Prepared” students is 70% or greater.

Table AH displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table AH Percentile Percent Prepared for College/Career Status Level

5 2.1 Very Low 10 5.6 Very Low

14.8 10.0 Low 15 10.9 Low

17.3 14.1 Low 20 17.6 Low 25 25.5 Low 30 29.3 Low 35 32.5 Low 40 35.0 Medium

41.8 35.1 Medium 45 37.1 Medium 50 39.8 Medium 55 42.4 Medium 60 45.2 Medium 65 47.8 Medium 70 51.2 Medium 75 54.4 Medium

75.5 55.0 High 80 58.0 High

83.4 61.4 High 85 63.0 High 90 68.3 High

91.4 70.0 Very High

Appendix A



College/Career Indicator (Cont.)

Change is the difference between the current Status and the prior year Status. Table AI displays the cut scores for each Change level as approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting. Table AI:

Change Level Change Cut Score Declined Significantly Declined by 9.1% or more

Declined Declined 2.0% to 9.0% Maintained Declined or increased by 1.9% Increased Increased by 2.0% to 8.9%

Increased Significantly Increased 9.0% or more

Table AJ displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table AJ: Percentile Change from Prior Year to Current Year Change Levels

5 -11.1 Declined Significantly 6.1 -9.0 Declined 10 -6.4 Declined 15 -4.6 Declined 20 -3.1 Declined 25 -2.2 Declined 27 -2.0 Declined 30 -1.3 Maintained 35 -0.6 Maintained 40 0 Maintained 45 0.4 Maintained 50 1.1 Maintained 55 1.5 Maintained 58 2.0 Increased 60 2.3 Increased 65 3.2 Increased 70 4.2 Increased 75 5.2 Increased 80 6.5 Increased 85 8.4 Increased

86.3 9.0 Increased Significantly 90 10.9 Increased Significantly 95 15 Increased Significantly

Appendix A



College/Career Indictor (Cont.)

Five-by-Five Color Tables and Performance Levels for LEAs, Schools, and Student Groups

Table AK reflects the five-by-five colored table was approved by the SBE at its November 2018 meeting.

Table AK:

District College/Career Indicator

Performance Level




(by 2.0% to 9.0%)


Year (declined or

increased by 1.9% or less)


Year (by 2.0% to 8.9%)

Increased Significantly from Prior Year (by 9.0% or more)


Current Year


High 55.0% to 69.9% in

Current Year



Current Year


Low 10.0% to 34.9% in

Current Year


Very Low 9.9% or lower in

Current Year


Appendix A



English Learner Progress Indicator The SBE at their November 2019 meeting approved the 2019 English Learner Progress Indicator (ELPI) methodology. Status: For the ELPI, Status is the number of ELs who moved up at least one ELPI level or maintained the ELP criterion (level 4) from prior year to current year divided by the number of ELPAC SA takers in current year. Table AL displays the Status Rate cut scores for each of the Status levels.

Table AL

Status Level Status Rate Cut Score

Very Low Less than 35% of EL students increased at least one ELPI level or maintained the ELP criterion (level 4). 35% to less than 45% of EL students increased at

Low least one ELPI level or maintained the ELP criterion (level 4). 45% to less than 55% of EL students increased at

Medium least one ELPI level or maintained the ELP criterion (level 4). 55% to less than 65% of EL students increased at

High least one ELPI level or maintained the ELP criterion (level 4).

Very High 65% or more of EL students increased at least one ELPI level or maintained the ELP criterion (level 4).

Appendix A



English Learner Progress Indicator (Cont.)

Table AM displays the ELPI Status cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table AM

Percentile Status Rate Status Level 5 31.1 Very Low

9.1 34.9 Very Low 10 35.5 Low 15 38.6 Low 20 41.1 Low 25 42.8 Low 30 44.1 Low

32.7 44.9 Low 35 45.5 Medium 40 46.9 Medium 45 48.0 Medium 50 49.0 Medium 55 50.1 Medium 60 51.3 Medium 65 52.6 Medium 70 53.8 Medium

74.5 54.9 Medium 75 55.1 High 80 56.8 High 85 59.1 High 90 62.1 High

93.5 64.8 High 95 67.3 Very High

N = 1,301

Appendix A



Academic Engagement Chronic Absenteeism

Status is the current chronic absenteeism rate. Table AN displays the cut scores for each Status level as approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting.

Table AN: Status Level Status Cut Score

Very Low Chronic absenteeism rate is 2.5% or less Low Chronic absenteeism rate is 2.6% to 5.0%

Medium Chronic absenteeism rate is 5.1% to 10% High Chronic absenteeism rate is 10.1% to 20%

Very High Chronic absenteeism rate is 20.1% or more



Chronic Absenteeism Indicator (Cont.)

Table AO displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table AO: Percentile Chronic Absenteeism Rate Status Levels

5 29.0 Very High 10 21.3 Very High

11.1 20.0 High 15 17.4 High 20 15.0 High 25 13.3 High 30 12.2 High 35 11.1 High 40 10.1 High

40.6 10.0 Medium 45 9.2 Medium 50 8.4 Medium 55 7.7 Medium 60 6.9 Medium 65 6.2 Medium 70 5.7 Medium 75 5.0 Low 80 4.3 Low 85 3.5 Low 90 2.5 Very Low 95 0.9 Very Low

Appendix A



Change is the difference between the current Status and the prior year Status. Table AP displays the cut scores for each Change level as approved at the November 2018 SBE meeting.

Table AP: Change Level Change Cut Score

Declined Significantly Chronic absenteeism rate declined by 3% or more Declined Chronic absenteeism rate declined by 0.5% to 2.9%

Maintained Chronic absenteeism rate declined or increased by 0.4% Increased Chronic absenteeism rate increased by 0.5% to 3.0%

Increased Significantly Chronic absenteeism rate increased by more than 3%

Table AQ displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table AQ: Percentile Difference from Prior Year to Current Year Change Level

5 6.8 Increased Significantly 10 4.2 Increased Significantly 14 3.0 Increased 15 2.8 Increased 20 2.1 Increased 25 1.6 Increased 30 1.2 Increased 35 0.9 Increased 40 0.6 Increased

40.7 0.5 Increased 45 0.4 Maintained 50 0.1 Maintained 55 0.0 Maintained 60 -0.2 Maintained 65 -0.5 Declined 70 -0.7 Declined 75 -1.2 Declined 80 -1.6 Declined 85 -2.3 Declined

88.1 -3.0 Declined Significantly 90 -3.4 Declined Significantly 95 -5.5 Declined Significantly

Appendix A



Chronic Absenteeism Indicator (Cont.)


Table AR reflects the five-by-five colored table was approved by the SBE at its November 2018 meeting.

Table AR

District Chronic Absenteeism Indicator

Performance Level


from Prior Year

(by greater than 3.0%)


Year (by 0.5% to 3.0%)


Year (declined or increased by less than

0.5%)

Declined from Prior


3.0%)


from Prior Year

(by 3.0% or more)

Very Low 2.5% or less

in Current Year


Low More than

2.5% to 5.0% Orange Yellow Green Green Blue in Current

Year

Medium More than 5.0% to Orange Orange Yellow Green Green 10.0% in

Current YearHigh

More than 10.0% to Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow 20.0% in

Current Year

Very High More than 20.0% in

Current Year


Appendix A



Graduation Rate Indicator for All LEAs and Non-DASS Schools Status is the current combined four-and five-year graduation rate. Because the inclusion of fifth year graduates increases graduation rates, the SBE approved the raising of the cut score for the “Very Low” level from “below 67 percent” to “below 68 percent” at the September 2019 meeting. In November 2019, the SBE also approved the increase of the long-term goal (a requirement under ESSA) from 90% to 90.5%. Table AS displays the approved cut scores for each “Status” level. Table AS:

Status Level Status Cut Score Very Low Graduation rate is 67.9% or lower

Low Graduation rate is 68.0% to 79.9% Medium Graduation rate is 80.0% to 90.4%

High Graduation rate is 90.5% to 94.9% Very High Graduation rate is 95.0% or higher

Table AT displays the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table AT: Percentile Graduation Rate Status Level

5 65.2 Very Low 5.4 67.2 Very Low 10 78.0 Low

11.5 80.2 Medium 15 83.3 Medium 20 86.5 Medium 25 88.4 Medium 30 89.9 Medium 31 90.1 Medium 35 90.9 High 40 91.8 High 45 92.6 High 50 93.25 High 55 94.0 High 60 94.6 High 65 95.1 Very High 70 95.7 Very High 75 96.3 Very High 80 96.8 Very High 85 97.5 Very High 90 98.1 Very High 95 99.0 Very High

Appendix A



Graduation Rate Indicator (Cont.)

Change is the difference between the current graduation rate and the prior year graduation rate. Table AU displays the cut scores for each “Change” level approved by the SBE.

Table AU Change Level Change Cut Score

Declined Significantly Graduation rate declined by more than 5%. Declined Graduation rate declined by 1% to 5%.

Maintained Graduation rate declined or increased by less than 0.9%. Increased Graduation rate increased by 1% to 4.9%.

Increased Significantly Graduation rate increased by 5% or more.

Table AV displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA-level distribution.

Table AV Percentile Graduation Rate Change Change Level

5 -9.4200 Declined Significantly 10 -6.7400 Declined Significantly 15 -5.3000 Declined Significantly

16.5 -5.0000 Declined 20 -4.4000 Declined 25 -3.6000 Declined 30 -3.0000 Declined 35 -2.4000 Declined 40 -1.9000 Declined 45 -1.6000 Declined 50 -1.2000 Declined 52 -1.0000 Declined 55 -0.7000 Maintained 60 -0.3000 Maintained 65 0.4000 Maintained

69.5 1.0000 Increased 70 1.1000 Increased 75 1.6000 Increased 80 2.5800 Increased 85 3.9000 Increased

89.5 5.0000 Increased Significantly 90 5.3400 Increased Significantly 95 8.3000 Increased Significantly

Appendix A



Graduation Rate Indicator (Cont.)

Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for LEAs, Comprehensive High Schools, and Student Groups

Table AW identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores presented earlier. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that LEAs and schools would earn based on their “Status” and “Change” results.

Table AW Graduation Rate Indicator

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by 5.1% or greater)




less than 1.0%)




Very High 95.0% or greater in N/A Blue Blue Blue Blue

Current Year

High 90.5% to 94.9% in

Current Year


Medium 80.0% to 90.4% in

Current Year


Low 68.0% to 79.9% in

Current Year


Very Low 67.9% or Lower in Red Red Red Red Red

Current Year

Appendix A



Note:

• Red Performance Level: The “Red Performance Level” is different for the Graduation Rate Indicator compared to the other indicators. All LEAs and schools with a graduation rate below 68 percent will be placed in the Red performance level.

• Blue Performance Level: Any LEA or school with a graduation rate at or above 95 percent will be categorized in the Blue performance level regardless of their “Change” results. For example, a school with a graduation rate of 98 percent in their prior year and a graduation rate of 96 percent in the current year will be placed in the Blue performance level.

Graduation Rate Indicator for DASS Schools As noted in the above section, the Status cut scores set for DASS schools also includes the “Very Low” level which was changed to less than 68 percent at the September 2019 State Board of Education meeting. It also reflects the SBE approval, in November 2019, the increase of the long-term goal (a requirement under ESSA) from 90% to 90.5%.The Status and Change cut scores are reflected in Tables AX and AZ. Status is the current DASS graduation rate (for the 2018–19 school year). Change is the difference between the current graduation rate and the prior year graduation rate. Table AX

Status Level Status Cut Scores Very Low Graduation rate is less than 68%

Low Graduation rate is 68% to less than 70% Medium Graduation rate is 70% to less than 80%

High Graduation rate is 80% to less than 90.5% Very High Graduation rate is 90.5% or greater

Table AY

Change Level Change Cut Scores Declined Significantly Graduation rate declined by more than 10%

Declined Graduation rate declined by 3% to 10% Maintained Graduation rate declined or increased by less than 3% Increased Graduation rate increased by 3% to less than 10%

Increased Significantly Graduation rate increased by 10% or greater

Appendix A



Graduation Rate Indicator for DASS Schools (Cont.)

Five-by-Five Color Table and Performance Levels for DASS Schools

Table AZ identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores presented earlier. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that LEAs and schools would earn based on their “Status” and “Change” results.

Table AZ: Graduation Rate Indicator – DASS Schools

Performance Level


more than 10.0%)



Year (declined or increased by

less than 3.0%)

Increased from Prior Year (by

3.0% to less than 10.0%)

Increased Significantly from Prior Year (by 10.0% or greater)

Very High 90.5% or greater in N/A Blue Blue Blue Blue

Current Year

High 80.0% to less than 90.5% in Current Year


Medium 70.0% to less than 80.0% in Current Year


Low 68.0% to less than 70.0% in Current Year


Very Low Less than 68.0% in Red Red Red Red Red

Current Year

Appendix A



Conditions & Climate

Suspension Rate Indicator The Suspension Rate Indicator is based on multiple distributions because the suspension data varies widely among local educational agency (LEA) type (elementary, high, and unified) and school type (elementary, middle, and high). There are six different sets of cut points for “Status” and “Change”: (1) three sets based on LEA type distributions and (2) three sets based on school type distributions.

LEA-Level Status

“Status” is the current year suspension rate. Table BA displays the cut scores for each “Status” level by LEA type: elementary, high, and unified school districts.

Table BA Status Elementary High Unified Level School District School District School District

Very Low Suspension rate is or less.

0.5% Suspension rate is or less.


1.0%

Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Low greater than 0.5% to greater than 1.5% to greater than 1.0% to

1.5%. 3.5%. 2.5%. Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Suspension rate is

Medium greater than 1.5% to greater than 3.5% to greater than 2.5% to 3.0%. 6.0%. 4.5%.

Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Suspension rate is High greater than 3.0% to greater than 6.0% to greater than 4.5% to

6.0%. 9.0%. 8.0%.

Very Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Suspension rate is High greater than 6.0%. greater than 9.0%. greater than 8.0%.

Tables BB through BD display the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide LEA distributions.

Appendix A



Suspension Rate Indicator (Cont.)

Table BB: Elementary School Districts Percentile Suspension

Rate Status Level


11.2 6.0 High 15 5.4 High 20 4.6 High 25 4.0 High 30 3.5 High 35 3.1 High

36.1 3.0 Medium 40 2.8 Medium 45 2.6 Medium 50 2.1 Medium 55 1.9 Medium 60 1.6 Medium 61 1.5 Low 65 1.3 Low 70 1.1 Low 75 0.7 Low 80 0.5 Very Low 85 0.3 Very Low 90 0.0 Very Low 95 0.0 Very Low

Table BC: High School Districts Percentile Suspension

Rate Status Level

5 12.0 Very High 10 11.3 Very High 15 9.5 Very High 16 9.0 High 20 8.6 High 25 7.9 High 30 7.4 High 35 7.0 High 40 6.6 High 44 6.0 Medium 45 5.9 Medium 50 5.6 Medium 55 5.2 Medium 60 4.7 Medium 65 4.6 Medium 70 4.2 Medium 75 3.7 Medium 80 3.5 Low 85 2.6 Low 90 1.8 Low

93.3 1.5 Very Low 95 1.4 Very Low

Appendix A




Table BD: Unified School Districts Percentile Status Rate Status Level


10.4 8.0 High 15 7.2 High 20 6.5 High 25 5.9 High 30 5.6 High 35 5.1 High 40 4.7 High 42 4.5 Medium 45 4.3 Medium 50 4.0 Medium 55 3.7 Medium 60 3.3 Medium 65 3.0 Medium 70 2.8 Medium

73.1 2.5 Low 75 2.4 Low 80 2.2 Low 85 1.8 Low 90 1.4 Low


Appendix A




LEA-Level Change

“Change” is the difference between the current year suspension rate and the prior year suspension rate. Table BE displays the proposed cut scores for each “Change” level by LEA type.

Table BE Change

Level Elementary School

District High School District Unified School District


Suspension rate declined by 2% or

greater.


greater.


greater. Suspension rate Suspension rate Suspension rate

Declined declined by 0.3% to declined by 0.5% to declined by 0.3% to less than 2%. less than 3%. less than 2%

Suspension rate Suspension rate Suspension rate Maintained declined or increased declined or increased declined or increased

by less than 0.3%. by less than 0.5%. by less than 0.3%. Suspension rate Suspension rate Suspension rate

Increased increased by 0.3% to increased by 0.5% to increased by 0.3% to 2%. 3%. 2%.


Suspension rate increased by greater

than 2%.


than 3%.


than 2%.

Appendix A




Tables BF through BH displays the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide LEA type.

Table BF: Elementary School Districts (Suspension)

Percentile

% Change from Prior

Year to Current

Year

Change Level

5 2.3 Increased Significantly

6.7 2.0 Increased 10 0.9 Increased 15 0.6 Increased 20 0.3 Increased 25 0.2 Maintained 30 0.1 Maintained 35 0.0 Maintained 40 0.0 Maintained 45 -0.1 Maintained 50 -0.2 Maintained 55 -0.3 Declined 60 -0.4 Declined 65 -0.5 Declined 70 -0.8 Declined 75 -0.9 Declined 80 -1.1 Declined 85 -1.5 Declined

90 -2.0 Declined Significantly


Table BG: High School Districts (Suspension)

Percentile

% Change from Prior

Year to Current

Year

Change Level


5.3 3.0 Increased 10 0.9 Increased 15 0.6 Increased 16 0.5 Increased 20 0.3 Maintained 25 0.1 Maintained 30 -0.1 Maintained 35 -0.1 Maintained 40 -0.2 Maintained 45 -0.5 Maintained 50 -0.7 Maintained 55 -0.8 Maintained 60 -1.0 Maintained 65 -1.2 Maintained 70 -1.4 Declined 75 -1.6 Declined 80 -1.9 Declined 85 -2.3 Declined 90 -2.6 Declined



Appendix A




Table BH: Unified School Districts (Suspension)

Percentile % Change from Prior Year to Current Year Change Level

3 2.1 Increased Significantly 3.6 2.0 Increased 5 1.4 Increased 10 0.9 Increased 15 0.5 Increased 20 0.3 Increased 25 0.1 Maintained 30 0.0 Maintained 35 -0.2 Maintained 40 -0.2 Maintained

40.2 -0.3 Declined 45 -0.4 Declined 50 -0.5 Declined 55 -0.6 Declined 60 -0.9 Declined 65 -1.0 Declined 70 -1.2 Declined 75 -1.3 Declined 80 -1.7 Declined

83.7 -2.0 Declined Significantly 85 -2.1 Declined Significantly 90 -2.5 Declined Significantly 95 -3.2 Declined Significantly

Appendix A




School-Level Status

“Status” at the school-level uses the current year suspension rate. Table BI displays the cut scores for each “Status” level by school type (i.e., elementary, middle, and high schools). Note that for K-12 schools, the unified school district Status cut scores, Change cut scores, and five-by-five tables will be applied.

Table BI Status Level Elementary School Middle School High School

Very Low Suspension rate is or less.



0.5%

Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Low greater than 0.5% to greater than 0.5% to greater than 0.5% to

1.0%. 2%. 1.5%.

Medium Suspension rate is greater than 1% to 3%.

Suspension rate is greater than 2% to 8%.

Suspension rate is greater than 1.5% to 6%.

High Suspension rate is greater than 3% to 6%.



Very Suspension rate is Suspension rate is Suspension rate is High greater than 6%. greater than 12%. greater than 10%.

Tables BJ through BL display the “Status” cut scores based on the statewide distributions for elementary, middle, and high schools.

Appendix A



Table BJ: Elementary Schools

Percentile Suspension Rate

Status Level

5 6.7 Very High 6 6.0 High

10 4.7 High 15 3.7 High 20 3.0 Medium 25 2.4 Medium 30 2.0 Medium 35 1.7 Medium 40 1.4 Medium 45 1.2 Medium 50 1.0 Low 55 0.8 Low 60 0.7 Low 65 0.5 Very Low 70 0.4 Very Low 75 0.2 Very Low 80 0.2 Very Low 85 0.0 Very Low 90 0.0 Very Low 95 0.0 Very Low

Table BK: Middle Schools

Percentile Suspension Rate

Status Level

5 18.3 Very High 10 14.3 Very High 15 12.1 Very High

15.1 12.0 High 20 10.7 High 25 9.5 High 30 8.6 High

32.9 8.0 Medium 35 7.6 Medium 40 6.9 Medium 45 6.1 Medium 50 5.5 Medium 55 4.8 Medium 60 4.3 Medium 65 3.7 Medium 70 3.1 Medium 75 2.6 Medium 80 2.0 Low 85 1.5 Low 90 0.9 Low


Appendix A



Table BL: High SchoolsPercentile Suspension Rate Status Level


11.2 10.0 High 15 8.7 High 20 7.3 High 25 6.5 High

27.8 6.0 Medium 30 5.7 Medium 35 5.0 Medium 40 4.4 Medium 45 3.8 Medium 50 3.3 Medium 55 2.8 Medium 60 2.4 Medium 65 1.9 Medium

68.4 1.5 Low 70 1.4 Low 75 0.9 Low 80 0.5 Very Low 85 0.1 Very Low 90 0.0 Very Low 95 0.0 Very Low

Appendix A




School-Level Change

“Change” at the school-level is the difference between the current year suspension rate and the prior year suspension rate. Table BM displays the cut scores for each “Change” level by school type. Note that for K-12 schools, the unified school district Status cut scores, Change cut scores, and five-by-five tables will be applied.

Table BM Change Level Elementary School Middle School High School



greater.


greater.


greater. Suspension rate Suspension rate Suspension rate

Declined declined by 0.3% to declined by 0.3% to declined by 0.3% to less than 1%. less than 3%. less than 2%.

Suspension rate Suspension rate Suspension rate Maintained declined or increased declined or increased declined or increased

by less than 0.3%. by less than 0.3%. by less than 0.3%. Suspension rate Suspension rate Suspension rate

Increased increased by 0.3% to increased by 0.3% to increased by 0.3% to 2%. 4%. 3%.



than 2%.


than 4%.


than 3%.

Appendix A




Tables BN through BP display the “Change” cut scores based on the statewide distributions for elementary, middle, and high schools.

Table BN: Elementary Schools (Suspension)

Percentile % Change from

Prior Year to Current Year

Change Level


5 2.0 Increased 10 1.2 Increased 15 0.7 Increased 20 0.5 Increased 25 0.3 Increased 30 0.2 Maintained 35 0.0 Maintained 40 0.0 Maintained 45 0.0 Maintained 50 -0.1 Maintained 55 -0.2 Maintained 60 -0.3 Declined 65 -0.5 Declined 70 -0.6 Declined 75 -0.8 Declined

76.9 -1.0 Declined Significantly





Table BO: Middle Schools (Suspension)

Percentile % Change from

Prior Year to Current Year

Change Level


5.5 4.0 Increased 10 2.3 Increased 15 1.5 Increased 20 0.9 Increased 25 0.5 Increased

26.8 0.3 Increased 30 0.1 Maintained 35 0.0 Maintained 40 -0.2 Maintained

40.4 -0.3 Declined 45 -0.5 Declined 50 -0.8 Declined 55 -1.0 Declined 60 -1.3 Declined 65 -1.7 Declined 70 -2.2 Declined 75 -2.7 Declined

77.6 -3.0 Declined Significantly





Appendix A




Table BP: High Schools (Suspension)

Percentile % Change from Prior Year to Current Year Change Level

5 4.2900 Increased Significantly 6.7 3.0000 Increased 10 2.0000 Increased 15 1.2000 Increased 20 0.6600 Increased 25 0.4000 Increased

25.7 0.3000 Increased 30 0.2000 Maintained 35 0.0000 Maintained 40 0.0000 Maintained 45 0.0000 Maintained 50 -0.2000 Maintained 51 -0.3000 Declined 55 -0.4000 Declined 60 -0.6000 Declined 65 -0.9000 Declined 70 -1.2000 Declined 75 -1.5000 Declined 80 -1.9000 Declined

80.6 -2.0000 Declined Significantly 85 -2.5000 Declined Significantly 90 -3.4000 Declined Significantly 95 -5.3900 Declined Significantly

Appendix A





Tables BQ through BV identifies the “Status” and “Change” cut scores presented earlier based on district and school types. It also reflects the performance levels (or colors) that LEAs and schools would earn based on their “Status” and “Change” results.

Table BQ: Suspension Indicator (Elementary District)

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by

greater than 2.0%)




less than 0.3%)

Declined from Prior Year (by 0.3% to

less than 2.0%)


(from Prior Year by 2.0% or greater)


in Current Year


Low Greater than 0.5% to 1.5% N/A Yellow Green Green Blue

in Current Year


in Current Year



in Current Year





Appendix A




Table BR: Suspension Indicator (High School District)

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by

greater than 3.0%)




less than 0.5%)


less than 3.0%)




in Current Year


Low Greater than 1.5% to 3.5% Orange Yellow Green Green Blue

in Current Year


in Current Year



in Current Year





Appendix A




Table BS: Suspension Indicator (Unified School District and K-12 Schools)

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by

greater than 2.0%)




less than 0.3%)

Declined from Prior Year (by

0.3% to less than

2.0%)




in Current Year


Low Greater than 1.0% to 2.5% Orange Yellow Green Green Blue

in Current Year


in Current Year



in Current Year





Appendix A




Table BT: Suspension Indicator (Elementary School)

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by

greater than 2.0%)




less than 0.3%)


less than 1.0%)




in Current Year



in Current Year


in Current Year



in Current Year





Appendix A




Table BU: Suspension Indicator (Middle School)

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by

greater than 4.0%)




less than 0.3%)


less than 3.0%)




in Current Year



in Current Year


in Current Year


High Greater than

8.0% to Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow 12.0% in

Current Year Very High

Greater than 12.0% in

Current Year


Appendix A




Table BV: Suspension Indicator (High School)

Performance Level


from Prior Year (by

greater than 3.0%)




less than 0.3%)


less than 2.0%)




in Current Year



in Current Year


in Current Year


High Greater than

6.0% to Red Orange Orange Yellow Yellow 10.0% in

Current Year Very High

Greater than 10.0% in

Current Year


Appendix A



Appendix B Self-Assessment Tools for Local Indicators 9 and 10

LCFF Priority 9: Self-Assessment Tool Assess the degree of implementation of the progress in coordinating instruction for expelled students in your county.

Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – Beginning Development; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – Full Implementation and Sustainability

Coordinating Instruction 1 2 3 4 5 1. Assessing status of triennial plan for providing

educational services to all expelled students inthe county, including:a. Review of required outcome data.b. Identifying existing educational alternatives forexpelled pupils, gaps in educational services toexpelled pupils, and strategies for filling thoseservice gaps.c. Identifying alternative placements for pupilswho are expelled and placed in districtcommunity day school programs, but who fail tomeet the terms and conditions of theirrehabilitation plan or who pose a danger to otherdistrict pupils.

2. Coordinating on development andimplementation of triennial plan with all LEAswithin the county.

3. Establishing ongoing collaboration and policydevelopment for transparent referral process forLEAs within the county to the county office ofeducation or other program options, includingdissemination to all LEAs within the county amenu of available continuum of services forexpelled students.

4. Developing memorandum of understandingregarding the coordination of partial creditpolicies between district of residence and countyoffice of education.



LCFF Priority 10: Self-Assessment Tool Assess the degree of implementation of coordinated service program components for foster youth in your county.

Rating Scale (lowest to highest): 1 – Exploration and Research Phase; 2 – Beginning Development; 3 – Initial Implementation; 4 – Full Implementation; 5 – Full Implementation and Sustainability Coordinating Services 1 2 3 4 5 1. Establishing ongoing collaboration and

supporting policy development, including establishing formalized information sharing agreements with child welfare, probation, Local Education Agency (LEAs), the courts, and other organizations to support determining the proper educational placement of foster youth (e.g., school of origin versus current residence, comprehensive versus alternative school, and regular versus special education).

2. Building capacity with LEA, probation, child welfare, and other organizations for purposes of implementing school-based support infrastructure for foster youth intended to improve educational outcomes (e.g., provide regular professional development with the Foster Youth Liaisons to facilitate adequate transportation services for foster youth).

3. Providing information and assistance to LEAs regarding the educational needs of foster youth in order to improve educational outcomes.

4. Providing direct educational services for foster youth in LEA or county-operated programs provided the school district has certified that specified services cannot be provided or funded using other sources, including, but not limited to, Local Control Funding Formula, federal, state or local funding.

5. Establishing ongoing collaboration and supporting development of policies and procedures that facilitate expeditious transfer of records, transcripts, and other relevant educational information.

6. Facilitating the coordination of post-secondary opportunities for youth by engaging with systems partners, including, but not limited to, child welfare transition planning and independent living services, community colleges or



Coordinating Services 1 2 3 4 5 universities, career technical education, and workforce development providers.

7. Developing strategies to prioritize the needs offoster youth in the community, using community-wide assessments that consider age group,geographical area, and identification of highestneeds students based on academic needs andplacement type.

8. Engaging in the process of reviewing plandeliverables and of collecting and analyzing LEAand COE level outcome data for purposes ofevaluating effectiveness of support services forfoster youth and whether the investment inservices contributes to improved educationaloutcomes for foster youth.



Appendix C

Academic Indicator: Participation Rate and Distance from Standard: Inclusion and Exclusion Flowchart

Determining Which Students Should Be Included in the Academic

Indicator for Grades Three through Eight and/or Grade Eleven

Step 1: Determine the Accountability Testing Window for the Smarter Balanced Assessments and California Alternate Assessment (CAA), Grades Three through Eight

and/or Eleven

Determine for each school, per grade span(s) and testing administration, as applicable.

Grades 3–8 and/or 11

Obtain the CAASPP student data file. Use grades 3–8 and/or 11 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments and CAA ELA and mathematics records.

Identify when the first student took the test, identify the last day of the testing window and apply appropriate grace periods*.

Establish the Accountability Testing Window.

*Grace Periods All grace periods are "calendar days" meaning that weekends and holidays are included in the count. The following rules are used to apply grace periods: Testing Window is 14 Calendar Days or Less: Schools with a testing window of 14 calendar days or less do not have any grace periods. In this instance, the 14 days (or less) is the accountability testing window. Testing Window is 15 to 30 Calendar Days: Schools with a testing window of 15 to 30 calendar days have one 14-day grace period applied at the end of the testing window (e.g., 14 days before the testing window ends, which includes the very last day of the testing window). Testing Window is 31 or More Calendar Days: Schools with a testing window of 31 or more calendar days have two 14-day grace periods: one at the beginning of the testing window (e.g., 14 days after the testing window begins, including the very first day of the testing window) and one at the end (e.g., 14 days before the testing window ends, which includes the very last day of the testing window). See Figure 15 for an illustration of the differences between testing window, accountability testing window, and grace periods.



Step 2: Determine the Denominator and Numerator of the Participation Rate

Enrollment During the Accountability Testing Window (Denominator) Calculate for each school, LEA, or student group separately in ELA and mathematics, and calculate separately for: (1) grades three through eight and (2) grade eleven. (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

1 For LEAs only, all students with disabilities (SWDs), which are students who have a valid primary disability code or took the CAAs, are included in the Dashboard of the district where they reside if they received special education services at another LEA, school or Non-Public School (NPS). At the school-level, all SWDs are included in the school where they attend.



Number of Students Tested (Numerator) Calculate for each LEA, school, or student group separately in ELA and mathematics. The calculations should also be conducted separately for: (1) grades three through eight and (2) grade eleven. (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)



Step 3: Calculate the Participation Rate

Calculate for each LEA, school, or student group separately in ELA and mathematics. The calculations should also be conducted separately for: (1) grades three through eight and (2) grade eleven.

Number of Students Tested divided by Enrollment = Participation Rate

Step 4: Determine the Distance from Standard

Valid Scores Determine which student records should be included in valid scores for each LEA, school, or student group separately in ELA and mathematics, and calculate separately for: (1) grades three through eight and (2) grade eleven. (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)

1 “Continuously enrolled” means the student was enrolled from the Fall Census Day (first Wednesday in October) through the first day of testing without a gap in enrollment of more than 30 consecutive calendar days. Continuous Enrollment Rule: If the student has been continuously enrolled in a school, the student is counted in the school. If the student has been continuously enrolled in the LEA, the student is counted in the LEA.



Distance from Standard Determine which student records should be included in the Distance from Standard for each LEA, school, or student group. Calculate separately for ELA and mathematics and for: (1) grades three through eight and (2) grade eleven. (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)



Step 5: Calculated Adjustment to Distance from Standard if Participation Rate Is Not Met

Calculate for each LEA, school, or student group separately in ELA and mathematics. The calculations should also be conducted separately for: (1) grades three through eight and (2) grade eleven.

Refer to Appendix E for the descriptive text of the flowcharts in this appendix. (Refer to Appendix F for Descriptive text)



Testing Codes Used The following are the Summative Assessment testing codes considered to determine the calculations for the Academic Indicator:

Summative Assessments Testing Codes

(NTE) Not tested due to significant medical emergency

(Smarter Balanced and CAA Attemptedness Flag) Student logged on to only a portion of the test (for example, only

logged on to either CAT or PT but not both) and made attempts on the test.

(Invalidated Score Status Flag) Student record was invalidated due to a testing security incident



Appendix D Scale Score Ranges for the

Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments

English Language Arts/Literacy

Mathematics

Grade Minimum Scale Score

Maximum Scale Score

Achievement Level

Scale Score Range for Standard Not Met

Achievement Level

Scale Score Range for Standard

Nearly Met

Achievement Level


Met

Achievement Level

Scale Score Range for Standard Exceeded

3 2189 2621 2189–2380 2381–2435 2436–2500 2501–2621

4 2204 2659 2204–2410 2411–2484 2485–2548 2549–2659

5 2219 2700 2219–2454 2455–2527 2528–2578 2579–2700

6 2235 2748 2235–2472 2473–2551 2552–2609 2610–2748

7 2250 2778 2250–2483 2484–2566 2567–2634 2635–2778

8 2265 2802 2265–2503 2504–2585 2586–2652 2653–2802

11 2280 2862 2280–2542 2543–2627 2628–2717 2718–2862

Grade Minimum Scale Score

Maximum Scale Score

Achievement Level

Scale Score Range for Standard Not Met

Achievement Level


Nearly Met

Achievement Level


Met

Achievement Level

Scale Score Range for Standard Exceeded

3 2114 2623 2114–2366 2367–2431 2432–2489 2490–2623

4 2131 2663 2131–2415 2416–2472 2473–2532 2533–2663

5 2201 2701 2201–2441 2442–2501 2502–2581 2582–2701

6 2210 2724 2210–2456 2457–2530 2531–2617 2618–2724

7 2258 2745 2258–2478 2479–2551 2552–2648 2649–2745

8 2288 2769 2288–2486 2487–2566 2567–2667 2668–2769

11 2299 2795 2299–2492 2493–2582 2583–2681 2682–2795



Appendix E Scale Score Ranges for the

California Alternate Assessments

English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics

Grade Minimum

Scale Score

Maximum Scale Score

Achievement Level Scale

Score Range for Level 1





3 300 399 300–344 345–359 360–399

4 400 499 400–444 445–459 460–499

5 500 599 500–544 545–559 560–599

6 600 699 600–644 645–659 660–699

7 700 799 700–744 745–759 760–799

8 800 899 800–844 845–859 860–899

11 900 999 900–944 945–959 960–999



Appendix F Descriptive Text for Images in the Guide

This section contains the descriptive text to the images presented throughout this guide to ensure accessibility to individuals with disabilities as required by Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

Figure 3: Three-by-Five Colored Table for Suspension Rate Indicator

A modified version of the Suspension Rate Indicator 5-by-5 table. This modified version is known as the 3-by-5 table and is used for small student populations with an n-size of 149 or less to determine a performance color. In the 3-by-5 model, the “Declined Significantly” and “Increase Significantly” columns for Change Performance Levels are eliminated. To depict this modification, all the performance color boxes under the both the “Declined Significantly” and “Increased Significantly” columns found in a traditional 5-by-5 table are outlined with a red-dotted line indicating these columns are not used to determine performance levels (color). There are arrows on both the left and right sides of the 5-by-5 that illustrate the 5-by-5 is being collapsed to a 3-by-5. Removing the far right and far left columns can impact the performance color for a school or student group if they have less than 149 students. For the Suspension Rate Indicator, if a small population has a high Status Level and a Change Level of Declined Significantly, a performance color of Yellow would be assigned based on the 5-by-5. However, because the Declined Significantly column is eliminated for small populations, the performance level assigned based on the 3-by-5 would be Orange.

Figure 4: Three-by-Five Colored Table for Graduation Rate Indicator

A modified version of the Graduation Rate Indicator 5-by-5 table. This modified version is known as the 3-by-5 table and is used for small student populations with an n-size of 149 or less to determine a performance color for the graduation rate and suspension rate indicators only. In the 3-by-5 model, the “Declined Significantly” and “Increase Significantly” columns for Change Performance Levels are eliminated. To depict this modification, all the performance color boxes under the both the “Declined Significantly” and “Increased Significantly” columns found in a traditional 5-by-5 table are outlined with a red-dotted line indicating these columns are not used to determine performance levels (color). There are arrows on both the left and right sides of the 5-by-5 that illustrate the five by five is being collapsed to a 3-by-5. Removing the far right and far left columns can impact the performance color for a school or student group if they have less than 149 students. For the Graduation Rate Indicator, if a small population has a high Status Level and a Change Level of Declined significantly, a performance color of Orange would be assigned based on the 5-by-5. However, because the Declined Significantly column is eliminated for small populations, the performance level assigned based on the 3-by-5 would be Yellow.



Figure 5: Three-by-Five Colored Table for Chronic Absenteeism Indicator

A modified version of the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator 5-by-5 table. This modified version is known as the 3-by-5 table and is used for small student populations with an n-size of 149 or less to determine a performance color for the graduation rate and suspension rate indicators only. In the 3-by-5 model, the “Declined Significantly” and “Increase Significantly” columns for Change Performance Levels are eliminated. To depict this modification, all the performance color boxes under the both the “Declined Significantly” and “Increased Significantly” columns found in a traditional 5-by-5 table are outlined with a red-dotted line indicating these columns are not used to determine performance levels (color). There are arrows on both the left and right sides of the 5-by-5 that illustrate the five by five is being collapsed to a 3-by-5. Removing the far right and far left columns can impact the performance color for a school or student group if they have less than 149 students. For the Chronic Absenteeism Indicator, if a small population has a high Status Level and a Change Level of Declined significantly, a performance color of Yellow would be assigned based on the 5-by-5. However, because the Declined Significantly column is eliminated for small populations,the performance level assigned based on the 3-by-5 would be Orange.

Figure 6: Three-by-Five Colored Table for College/Career Indicator

A modified version of the College/Career Indicator (CCI) 5-by-5 table. This modified version is known as the 3-by-5 table and is used for small student populations with an n-size of 149 or less to determine a performance color for the graduation rate and suspension rate indicators only. In the 3-by-5 model, the “Declined Significantly” and “Increase Significantly” columns for Change Performance Levels are eliminated. To depict this modification, all the performance color boxes under the both the “Declined Significantly” and “Increased Significantly” columns found in a traditional 5-by-5 table are outlined with a red-dotted line indicating these columns are not used to determine performance levels (color). There are arrows on both the left and right sides of the 5-by-5 that illustrate the five by five is being collapsed to a 3-by-5. Removing the far right and far left columns can impact the performance color for a school or student group if they have less than 149 students. For the CCI, if a small population has a high Status Level and a Change Level of Declined significantly, a performance color of Orange would be assigned based on the 5-by-5. However, because the Declined Significantly column is eliminated for small populations, the performance level assigned based on the 3-by-5 would be Yellow.

Figure 7: Dashboard Landing Page

The image is the example of the 2019 Dashboard Homepage. The top of the page has an image of a gauge with the arrow pointing to green. Tabs from left to right as follows:

• Home• About• State Summary• Search• More Information• En Espanol

Explore information about your local school and district with a search tab. There are two



search boxes: (1) you can find a district or school by entering the name in the left search box and (2) you can find a district or school by entering the name of a city or county in the right search box.

Figure 8: Performance on State and Local Indicators

The image is an example display of the Dashboard landing Page showing tabs from left to right:

• Chronic Absenteeism: Gauge is pointing to red• Suspension Rate: Gauge is pointing to green• English Learner Progress: Gauge reflects no performance color• Graduation Rates: Gauge is pointing to yellow• College/Career: Gauge is pointing to yellow• English Language Arts: Gauge is pointing to yellow• Mathematics: Gauge is pointing to yellow• Basic Teachers Instructional Materials, Facilities: Indicator is Standard Met• Implementation of Academic Standards: Indicator is Standard Met• Parent Engagement: Indicator is Standard Met• Local Climate Survey: Indicator is Standard Met

Figure 9: Student Population Data on Main Dashboard Landing Page

The image shows “Student Population” as the title and “explore information about this school’s population.” The tiles from left to right describe the following:

• Tile 1: Learn More: Enrollment 1,572• Tile 2: Learn More: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 89.8%• Tile 3: Learn More: English Learners 19.1%• Tile 4: Learn More: Foster Youth 1%

Figure 10: Student Population Descriptions

The image reflects the backside of Figure 8. Each section tiles provides a short description of the content of the tiles pertaining to student population. The description from left to right is as follows:

• Enrollment: Total number of students enrolled.

• Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: Percentage of students identified associoeconomically disadvantaged or coming from a background of poverty.

• English Learner: Percentage of students who are learning to communicate effectivelyin English, typically requiring instruction in both the English language and in theiracademic courses.

• Foster Youth: Percentage of students who have been removed from the custody of



their parent or guardian by the juvenile court.

Figure 11: Data on Each Measure

The image shows an example of the data reported for each state indicator. There are four baseball-like cards that contain the detail. Within each indicator there is an opportunity to view additional data by selecting at the top “Learn More,” “All Students,” and “State.” More information can also be accessed by selecting “View More Details.” Starting from left to right the indicators include the following:

• English Language Arts: The gauge arrow points to yellow.o 5.9 points above standardo Maintained 0.3 pointso Equity Report: Number of student groups in each color

2 Red 7 Orange 0 Yellow 3 Green 1 Blue

• Mathematics: The gauge arrow points to yellow.o 9.1 points above standardo Maintained -2.1 pointso Equity Report: Number of student groups in each color


• English Learner Progress:o 59.3% making progress towards English language proficiencyo Progress Levels

65% of higher = Very High 55% to less than 65% = High 45% to less than 55% = Medium 35% to less than 45% = Low Less than 35% = Very Low

• College/Career: The gauge arrow points to yellow.o 55.2% preparedo Declined -.2.4%




Figure 12: Equity Report

• Equity Report: Number of student groups in each coloro 2 Redo 7 Orangeo 0 Yellowo 3 Greeno 1 Blue

Figure 13: Student Group Details

The image shows an example of Student Group Details. There are six baseball-like cards that provide the data. Starting from left to right the indicators include the following:

• Gauge arrow points to red.o Foster Youtho Homelesso Students with Disabilities

• Gauge arrow points to orange.o African Americano English Learnerso Hispanico Pacific Islandero Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

• Gauge arrow points to yellow.o American Indian

• Gauge arrow points to green.o Filipinoo Two or More Raceso White

• Gauge arrow points to blue.o Asian

• Gauge reflects no performance color.o No Students

Figure 14: Viewing All Schools’ Performance At-a-Glance

This image reflects how a user can access the performance of all schools in a district in one viewing. Filters are available to the left of the report so that the school name can be ordered in ascending or descending order. A specific indicator can also be selected and ordered by ascending or descending performance. The image itself identifies one elementary school with yellow performance for chronic absenteeism and suspension rate; no performance color for the English Learner Progress; and orange performance for English language arts and mathematics. The image also contains information for another elementary school that has green performance in chronic absenteeism; yellow performance in suspension rate and English language arts; no performance color for English Learner Progress; and red for mathematics. Finally, the image reflects performance for a high school that has yellow



performance for suspension rate; no performance color for English Learner Progress; green performance for graduation rate; and orange performance for college/career.

Figure 15: How to Determine the Accountability Testing Window

This image depicts how the accountability testing window is determined for the participation rate. The larger testing window is the window selected by LEAs. The testing window for the Dashboard begins when the first student at the school takes the test (either CAT or PT). Once this smaller window is determined, then 14-day grace periods are applied at the ends. What is left in between the grace periods is the accountability testing window.

Table 20: College/Career Indicator Model

The College/Career Indicator (CCI) includes measures on how well LEAs and schools are preparing students for likely success after graduation. Graduates classified as Prepared on this state measure must meet at least one of the criteria in the Prepared level. The following reflects the criteria for Prepared:

1. Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments: Score of Level 3 “Standard Met” or higheron both English language arts/literacy (ELA) and mathematics.

2. Advanced Placement (AP) Exams: Score of 3 or higher on two AP exams

3. International Baccalaureate (IB) Exams: Score of 4 or higher on two IB exams

4. College Credit Courses: Two semesters, three quarters, or three trimesters of collegecoursework with a grade of C- or better in academic/Career Technical Educationsubjects where college credits are awarded.

5. State Seal of Biliteracy (SSB): SSB awarded and score of Level 3 or higher in ELA onthe Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments

6. Leadership/Military Science: Two years of Leadership/Military Science, score of Level3 or higher in ELA and math, and Level 2 “Standard Nearly Met” or higher in othersubject area

7. Career Technical Education (CTE) Pathway: Pathway completion with a grade of C- orbetter in the capstone course plus one of additional criteria below:

a. Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments: Level 3 or higher in ELA and atleast a Level 2 in mathematics, or Level 3 or higher in mathematics and at leasta Level 2 in ELA.

b. One semester/two quarters/two-trimesters of College Credit Courses with agrade of C- or better in academic/CTE subjects where college credits areawarded for each course



8. University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) a-g Requirements:complete a-g course requirements with a grade of C- or better plus one of theAdditional Criteria below:

a. Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments: Level 3 or higher in ELA and atleast a Level 2 in mathematics, or Level 3 or higher in mathematics and at leasta Level 2 in ELA.

b. One semester/two quarters/two-trimesters of College Credit Courses with agrade of C- or better in academic/CTE subjects where college credits areawarded for each course

c. Score of 3 on one AP exam or score of 4 on one IB exam

d. Completion of CTE Pathway

The following reflects the criteria for Approaching Prepared – page 2 of the image:

1. Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments: Score of Level 2 “Standard Nearly Met”or higher on both ELA and mathematics.

2. College Credit Courses: One semesters, two quarters, or two trimesters of collegecoursework with a grade of C- or better in academic/Career Technical Educationsubjects where college credits are awarded.

3. Leadership/Military Science: Two years of Leadership/Military Science

4. CTE Pathway: Pathway completion with a grade of C- or better in the capstone course

5. UC and CSU a-g Requirements: Complete a-g course requirements with a grade of C- or better

The following steps are descriptive text for the flowchart in Appendix C.

Step 1: Determine the Accountability Testing Window for Smarter Balanced Assessments and California Alternate Assessments, Grade 3 through 8 and/or 11

• Obtain the CAASPP student data file. Use grades 3-8 and/or 11 Smarter BalancedSummative Assessments and CAA ELA and mathematics records.

• Identify when the first student took the test and apply appropriate grace periods.• Establish the Accountability Testing Window.

Step 2: Determine the Denominator and Numerator of the Participation Rate 1) Obtain Smarter Balanced Summative Assessment and CAA student records for

grades 3 – 8. Do the same separately for grade 11.2) Is the student record free of exceptions?

a) Yes: Go to 2.



b) No: Record shows “N” or blank for smarter Attemptedness Flag - And – Record shows “Yes” for Special Condition Code NTE – OR – For ELA only, record was for an EL student and shows, in CALPADS, that an EL student first enrolled in a U.S. school after April 15 of the year prior to testing. [Do not Include in Enrollment]

3) Was the student enrolled during the testing window? a) Yes: Go to 3.

4) Did the student transfer during the testing window? a) Yes: Go to 4.Transfer Type – Did the student transfer in? Go to 4. Did the student

transfer out? Go to 5. b) No: Include in Enrollment, add records with District of Special Education

Accountability (LEAs only) 5) Transfer Type

a) Transfer In: Go to 5. b) Transfer Out: Go to 6.

6) Transfer In a) During the first grace period? – Yes (Include in Enrollment) b) During the accountability testing window? – Yes (Include in Enrollment) c) During the last grace period? – Yes (Do not include in Enrollment)

7) Transfer Out a) During the first grace period? – Yes (Do not include in Enrollment) b) During the accountability testing window? – Yes (Include in Enrollment) c) During the last grace period? – Yes (Include in Enrollment)

Flow Chart for the Number of Students Tested 1) Enrollment 2) Is the Student record free of condition codes?

a) Yes: Go to 3 b) No: Go to 5 (Record is for a student who used an unlisted resource that changed

the construct of the test. Do not include in Number of Students Tested 3) Did the student log onto both the Computer Adaptive Test (CAT) and Performance

Task (PT) for the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments or did the student log onto the CAA? a) Yes: Go to 4 b) No: Go to 5

4) Include in Number of Students Tested 5) Do not include in Number of Students Tested

Step 4: Determine the Distance from Standard

Valid Scores 1) Number of Students Tested 2) Was the student continuously enrolled for a full academic year?

a) Yes: Go to 3



b) No: Go to 4 3) Include in Valid Scores 4) CALPADS record shows: (1) student enrolled after Fall Census Day or (2) student

enrolled before Fall Census Day with a break in enrollment of more than 30 consecutive calendar days. – OR – For both ELA and math, any student record that shows that an EL student was first enrolled in a U.S. school after April 15 of the year prior to testing. (Do not include in Valid Scores)


1) Valid Scores 2) Is the record a Smarter Balanced Summative Assessment record?

a) Yes: Go to 3 b) No: Record is CAA.

i. Does the record have an achievement level other than a LOSS? (1) Yes: Got to 3 (2) No: Record has a LOSS or no scale score. Do not include in Distance

from Standard 3) Is the record free of testing irregularities?

a) Yes: Go to 4 b) No: Record is invalid. Assign the record the LOSS.

4) Does the record have a score that can be used to calculate the difference from the lowest scale score for Standard Met? a) Yes: Go to 5

5) Include in Distance from Standard 6) Do not include in Distance from Standard

Step 5: Calculated Adjustment to Distance from Standard if Participation Rate is Not Met

1) Distance from Standard 2) The LEA, school, or student group did not meet the 95% participation rate target

a) Yes: Go to 3 b) No: Go to 6 – LEA, school, or student group met the 95% participation rate goal.

3) Take the total percentage points that the LEA, school, or student group falls short from the 95% participation rate target and multiply by 0.25

4) Take the amount calculated above and subtract it from the DFS 5) Reduction made to Distance from Standard 6) No reduction made to Distance from Standard



CDE Contacts and Related Internet Pages

Topic Contact Office Web Page

Analysis, Measurement, and Accountability Reporting Division 916-319-0869

• Calculations on the Academic Accountability Unit https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/Academic, 916-319-0863 ac/cm/ College/Career, Chronic [email protected] Absenteeism, Graduation https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/Rate, and Suspension ac/dass.asp Rate Indicators

• Dashboard Alternative [email protected] School Status (DASS)

• SAT/ACT/Advanced [email protected] https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/Placement Reports sp/ai/

• Calculations on ELPI Data Visualization and Reporting Office 916-322-3245 [email protected]

• DataQuest Data Reporting Office https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataq916-327-0219 uest/ English Learner Support Division 916-319-0938

• Title III Language Policy and https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/Leadership Office el/t3/ 916-319-0845

Assessment Development and Administration Division 916-319-0803

• CAASPP – Smarter California Assessment of https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tBalanced Summative Student Performance and g/ca/ Assessments and Progress Office California Alternate 916-445-8765 Assessments [email protected]









https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/ai/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/ai/

https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/

https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/


https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/



Topic Contact Office Web Page

Educational Data Management Division 916-324-1214

• CALPADS CALPADS/CBEDS/CDS https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/Operations Office sp/cl/ 916-324-6738 [email protected]

• Local Control Funding Local Agency Systems https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/Formula Support Office aa/lc/

• Local Control and [email protected] Accountability Plans

• Local Indicators • System of Support Office [email protected]. https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/

gov sw/t1/csss.asp


• Career Technical Career and College https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/c

Education Pathways Transition Division t/ • College Preparation and 916-445-2652

Postsecondary Programs

• Charter Schools Charter Schools Division https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ cs/

916-322-6029 [email protected]

• Special Education Special Education Division [email protected] ov


https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/cl/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/cl/




https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/




https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/


https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/cs/

https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/cs/





AcronymsAAU Academic Accountability Unit

AP Advanced Placement

CAAs California Alternate Assessments

CALPADS California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System California Assessment of Student Performance and CAASPP Progress

CA NGSS CAST CAT CCI CD CDE CDS Code COE CTE CSU Dashboard DASS DFS DVRO EC

ED EL ELA ELPAC ELPI ELD

California Next Generation Science Standards

California Science Test

Computer Adaptive Test

College/Career Indicator

County-District

California Department of Education

County-District-School Code

County Office of Education

Career Technical Education

California State University

California School Dashboard

Dashboard Alternative School Status


Data Visualization and Reporting Office

Education Code

U.S. Department of Education

English learner

English language arts/literacy

English Language Proficiency Assessments for California

English Learner Progress Indicator

English Language Development



EOY ESSA 5 CCR

FRPM GED HiSET IB IEP LASSO LCAP LCFF LEA LOSS LTEL NPS ODS PT RFEP SARC SBE SED

SOC

SSPI

SWD

UC

WIC

Aronyms (Continued)

End-of-Year

Every Student Succeeds Act

California Code of Regulations, Title 5

Free or Reduced-Priced Meals

General Education Development

High School Equivalency Test

International Baccalaureate

Individualized Education Plan

Local Agency Systems Support Office

Local Control and Accountability Plan

Local Control Funding Formula

Local Educational Agency

Lowest Obtainable Scale Score

Long-term English Learner

Non-Public School

Operational Data Store

Performance Task

Reclassified Fluent English Proficient

School Accountability Report Card

State Board of Education

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

School Ownership Code

State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Student with Disabilities

University of California

Welfare and Institution Code

2019 california school dashboard technical guide: final ... · 2. key changes to the dashboard:...

Documents